Systems and methods for detecting and reacting to malicious activity in computer networks

ABSTRACT

Described herein are systems and methods for performing potentially malicious activity detection operations. Embodiments may include receiving data associated with a plurality of authentication messages; analyzing the received data associated with the plurality of authentication messages; determining, based on the analyzing, a plurality of characteristics of the data associated with the authentication messages; receiving data associated with a new authentication message communicated over the network; determining a plurality of characteristics of the data associated with the new authentication message; comparing at least one determined characteristic of the new authentication message data with at least one of: a determined characteristic of the plurality of authentication messages data, known valid data, and known invalid data; and generating, based on the comparison, an assessment of whether the new authentication message is indicative of the potentially malicious activity in the network.

PRIORITY

This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application No.62/158,135, filed May 7, 2015 and titled “Detecting Attacks in ComputerNetworks”; 62/234,112, filed Sep. 29, 2015 and titled “Reaction toSuspicious Activity in Computer Networks”; and 62/247,270 filed Oct. 28,2015 and titled “Systems and Methods for Detection of MaliciousActivity”; the disclosures of which are hereby each incorporated byreference.

BACKGROUND

Computer networks are increasingly under attack from malicious actors,including both actors with legitimate access to networks, and actorswithout such access. These targeted attacks may involve the maliciousactor establishing a foothold in the network, conducting reconnaissance,moving laterally within the network, acting on targets and assets withinthe network, exfiltrating data, and more. Organizations may investsignificant resources attempting to detect and mitigate attacks. Suchdetection or mitigation may focus on the network traffic, attempting todiscern potentially malicious activity from normal, permissibleactivity. Activity may be considered potentially malicious, rather thanactually malicious, in order to, for instance, avoid so-called “falsepositive” detection of malicious activity.

Network accounts may be entities for which authentication andauthorization policies and processes have been configured within thecomputer network. In some cases, malicious actors may rely oncompromised network accounts to engage in malicious activity. Networkaccounts may be compromised in various ways, including, for example, bycredential hijacking (e.g., through keylogging or memory scraping),creation of new credentials by malicious actors, and accountimpersonation. Additionally, some malicious actors may attempt tocircumvent proper authentication protocols within the computer networks.Some authentication protocols may operate using, for example, securityaccess tickets, which allow parties communicating over a non-securecomputer network to authenticate their identity to one another in asecure manner. Examples of authentication protocols include, forinstance, the Kerberos protocol, Single Sign-On, Simple and ProtectedGSSAPI Negotiation Mechanism, S/Key, Secure Remote Password protocol,Host Identity Protocol, etc., which may operate in Windows® networks orother types of networks.

Thus, there is a need for detection of potentially malicious activity incomputer networks. This potentially malicious activity may relate toauthentication protocols within the network and/or to any other activitythat can be abused or exploited by malicious actors. There is a furtherneed for mitigation and/or remediation controls in computer networks.Such mitigation and/or remediation controls may respond to detectedpotentially malicious activity in order to, for example, prevent orminimize harm to an organization and/or computer network.

SUMMARY

The disclosed embodiments describe systems and methods for detecting andremedying malicious activity in computer networks.

In some embodiments, a non-transitory computer readable medium mayinclude instructions that, when executed by at least one processor,cause the at least one processor to perform detection operations onsecure ticket data to detect potentially malicious activity. Theoperations may include obtaining encrypted data from an encryptedportion of a secure ticket, the obtained encrypted data having beencommunicated over a network; obtaining a decryption key corresponding tothe encrypted data; decrypting the encrypted data using the obtaineddecryption key to generate decrypted data elements; comparing thedecrypted data elements to at least one of known valid data elements andknown invalid data elements; and generating an assessment based on thecomparison, the assessment identifying whether the secure ticket isindicative of potentially malicious activity in the network.

In other embodiments, a network system may be configured for performingdetection operations on secure ticket data to detect potentiallymalicious activity. The network system may comprise at least onecomputer-readable memory storing instructions and at least one processorconfigured to execute the instructions to obtain encrypted data from anencrypted portion of a secure ticket, the obtained encrypted data havingbeen communicated over a network; obtain a decryption key correspondingto the encrypted data; decrypt the encrypted data using the obtaineddecryption key to generate decrypted data elements; compare thedecrypted data elements to at least one of known valid data elements andknown invalid data elements; and generate an assessment based on thecomparison, the assessment identifying whether the secure ticket isindicative of potentially malicious activity in the network.

In further embodiments, a computer-implemented method may performdetection operations on secure ticket data to detect potentiallymalicious activity. The method may comprise obtaining encrypted datafrom an encrypted portion of a secure ticket, the obtained encrypteddata having been communicated over a network; obtaining a decryption keycorresponding to the encrypted data; decrypting the encrypted data usingthe obtained decryption key to generate decrypted data elements;comparing the decrypted data elements to at least one of known validdata elements and known invalid data elements; and generating anassessment based on the comparison, the assessment identifying whetherthe secure ticket is indicative of potentially malicious activity in thenetwork.

In some embodiments, a non-transitory computer readable medium mayinclude instructions that, when executed by at least one processor,cause the at least one processor to perform operations for detectingpotentially malicious activity. The operations may comprise receivingdata associated with a plurality of authentication messages, wherein atleast some of the received data includes secure ticket data, theauthentication messages having been communicated over a network;analyzing the received data associated with the plurality ofauthentication messages; determining, based on the analyzing, aplurality of characteristics of the data associated with theauthentication messages, wherein a characteristic from the plurality ofcharacteristics includes the secure ticket data; receiving dataassociated with a new authentication message communicated over thenetwork; determining a plurality of characteristics of the dataassociated with the new authentication message; comparing at least onedetermined characteristic of the new authentication message data with atleast one of: a determined characteristic of the plurality ofauthentication messages data, known valid data, and known invalid data;and generating, based on the comparison, an assessment of whether thenew authentication message is indicative of the potentially maliciousactivity in the network.

In other embodiments, a network system may be configured for detectingpotentially malicious activity. The network system may comprise at leastone computer-readable memory storing instructions at least one processorconfigured to execute the instructions to receive data associated with aplurality of authentication messages, wherein at least some of thereceived data includes secure ticket data, the authentication messageshaving been communicated over a network; analyze the received dataassociated with the plurality of authentication messages; determine,based on the analysis, a plurality of characteristics of the dataassociated with the authentication messages, wherein a characteristicfrom the plurality of characteristics includes the secure ticket data;receive data associated with a new authentication message communicatedover the network; determine a plurality of characteristics of the dataassociated with the new authentication message; compare at least onedetermined characteristic of the new authentication message data with atleast one of: a determined characteristic of the plurality ofauthentication messages data, known valid data, and known invalid data;and generate, based on the comparison, an assessment of whether the newauthentication message is indicative of the potentially maliciousactivity in the network.

In further embodiments, a computer-implemented method may performpotentially malicious activity detection operations. The method maycomprise receiving data associated with a plurality of authenticationmessages, wherein at least some of the received data includes secureticket data, the authentication messages having been communicated over anetwork; analyzing the received data associated with the plurality ofauthentication messages; determining, based on the analyzing, aplurality of characteristics of the data associated with theauthentication messages, wherein a characteristic from the plurality ofcharacteristics includes the secure ticket data; receiving dataassociated with a new authentication message communicated over thenetwork; determining a plurality of characteristics of the dataassociated with the new authentication message; comparing at least onedetermined characteristic of the new authentication message data with atleast one of: a determined characteristic of the plurality ofauthentication messages data, known valid data, and known invalid data;and generating, based on the comparison, an assessment of whether thenew authentication message is indicative of the potentially maliciousactivity in the network.

In some embodiments, a non-transitory computer readable medium mayinclude instructions that, when executed by at least one processor,cause the at least one processor to perform operations responsive topotentially malicious activity. The operations may comprise receiving anindication of the potentially malicious activity in a computer network;identifying, based on data included in the indication, at least onenetwork account associated with the potentially malicious activity;determining, based on the identifying and further based on the dataincluded in the indication and according to a defined policy, at leastone responsive operation with respect to the at least one identifiednetwork account; and invoking, based on the determining, the at leastone responsive operation, the at least one responsive operation beingimplemented to mitigate the potentially malicious activity in thecomputer network.

In other embodiments, a network system may be configured forcyber-attack remediation operations. The network system may comprise atleast one computer-readable memory storing instructions and at least oneprocessor configured to execute the instructions to receive anindication of the potentially malicious activity in a computer network;identify, based on data included in the indication, at least one networkaccount associated with the potentially malicious activity; determine,based on the identifying and further based on the data included in theindication and according to a defined policy, at least one responsiveoperation with respect to the at least one identified network account;and invoke, based on the determining, the at least one responsiveoperation, the at least one responsive operation being implemented tomitigate the potentially malicious activity in the computer network.

In further embodiments, a computer-implemented method may performoperations responsive to potentially malicious activity. The method maycomprise receiving an indication of the potentially malicious activityin a computer network; identifying, based on data included in theindication, at least one network account associated with the potentiallymalicious activity; determining, based on the identifying and furtherbased on the data included in the indication and according to a definedpolicy, at least one responsive operation with respect to the at leastone identified network account; and invoking, based on the determining,the at least one responsive operation, the at least one responsiveoperation being implemented to mitigate the potentially maliciousactivity in the computer network.

Aspects of the disclosed embodiments may include tangiblecomputer-readable media that store software instructions that, whenexecuted by one or more processors, are configured for and capable ofperforming and executing one or more of the methods, operations, and thelike consistent with the disclosed embodiments. Also, aspects of thedisclosed embodiments may be performed by one or more processors thatare configured as special-purpose processor(s) based on softwareinstructions that are programmed with logic and instructions thatperform, when executed, one or more operations consistent with thedisclosed embodiments.

It is to be understood that both the foregoing general description andthe following detailed description are exemplary and explanatory only,and are not restrictive of the disclosed embodiments, as claimed.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and constitute apart of this specification, illustrate disclosed embodiments and,together with the description, serve to explain the disclosedembodiments. In the drawings:

FIG. 1 is a block diagram of an example computer network system, inaccordance with disclosed embodiments;

FIG. 2 is an example ticket for use in an authentication protocol, inaccordance with disclosed embodiments;

FIG. 3 is a flow chart illustrating an example method for detectingpotentially malicious activity in a computer network, in accordance withdisclosed embodiments;

FIG. 4 is a flow chart illustrating another example method for detectingpotentially malicious activity in a computer network, in accordance withdisclosed embodiments;

FIGS. 5A-5B illustrate an example method, and corresponding captureddata, for detecting a Golden Ticket Attack, in accordance with disclosedembodiments;

FIGS. 6A-6B illustrate an example method, and corresponding captureddata, for detecting a Pass-the-Ticket Attack that uses a TGT, inaccordance with disclosed embodiments;

FIGS. 7A-7B illustrate an example method, and corresponding captureddata, for detecting a Pass-the-Ticket Attack that uses an ST, inaccordance with disclosed embodiments;

FIGS. 8A-8B illustrate an example method, and corresponding captureddata, for detecting a PAC Attack, in accordance with disclosedembodiments;

FIGS. 9A-9B illustrate an example method, and corresponding captureddata, for detecting a Silver Ticket Attack, in accordance with disclosedembodiments;

FIGS. 10A-10B illustrate an example method, and corresponding captureddata, for detecting an Overpass-the-Hash Attack, in accordance withdisclosed embodiments;

FIG. 11 is a block diagram of an example detection system, in accordancewith disclosed embodiments;

FIGS. 12A-12C are flow charts illustrating example methods forperforming detection operations on secure ticket data to detectpotentially malicious activity, in accordance with disclosedembodiments;

FIG. 13 is a block diagram illustrating an example system for performingpotentially malicious activity detection operations on secure ticketdata, in accordance with disclosed embodiments;

FIG. 14 is a table of example decryption schemes, in accordance withdisclosed embodiments;

FIG. 15 is a block diagram illustrating an example system for performingdetection operations on a Kerberos protocol ticket to detect potentiallymalicious activity, in accordance with disclosed embodiments;

FIG. 16 is a block diagram of an example computer network including aremediation system, in accordance with disclosed embodiments;

FIGS. 17A-17C are block diagrams illustrating example remediationsystems for performing operations responsive to potentially maliciousactivity, in accordance with disclosed embodiments;

FIGS. 18A-18B are flow charts illustrating an example method forperforming operations responsive to potentially malicious activity, inaccordance with disclosed embodiments;

FIG. 19 is a block diagram of an example remediation system cooperatingwith a credentialing system, in accordance with disclosed embodiments;and

FIGS. 20A-20B illustrate example decrypted tickets for use in anauthentication protocol, in accordance with disclosed embodiments.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Reference will now be made in detail to the disclosed embodiments,examples of which are illustrated in the accompanying drawings.

FIG. 1 is a block diagram of an example computer network system 100, inaccordance with disclosed embodiments. As shown, computer network 100includes client 102, authentication system 104, service providing system106, detection system 108, and remediation system 110, all of which arecommunicatively coupled by network 112.

Client 102 and service providing system 106 may each take the form ofany of a network node, a web server, a data storage device, a mobiledevice, a smartphone, a tablet computer, a desktop computer, a notebookcomputer, a wearable computer, a watch computer, a glasses computer,and/or a computer at a kiosk, etc. Other clients and service providingsystems, including any computing device, are possible as well.

Authentication system 104 may be any computing device configured tofacilitate operation of an authentication protocol within network 112.Authentication system 104 may be configured to generate and/or exchangeauthentication messages with client 102 and service providing system106.

An example computer network authentication protocol is Kerberos.Kerberos authentication typically employs three parties: a client, atarget service (also sometimes referred to as a “principal” in Kerberosdocumentation), and a third-party, the Kerberos system, that enables thetarget service and, optionally the client, to authenticate each other.Other examples of authentication protocols include Single Sign-On,Simple and Protected GSSAPI Negotiation Mechanism, S/Key, Secure RemotePassword protocol, Host Identity Protocol, etc. In some embodiments,client 102 may serve as a client, service providing system 106 may serveas a target service, and authentication system 104 may serve as aKerberos (or other authentication) system.

In embodiments where the authentication system 104 follows the Kerberosprotocol, a Kerberos system may combine the functionalities of anAuthentication Service (AS), a Key Distribution Center (KDC), and aTicket-Granting Service (TGS).

Authentication using the Kerberos protocol may involve three steps: anAS Exchange step, a TGS Exchange step, and a Client-Server (CS) Exchangestep.

During the AS Exchange step, the client authenticates itself to the ASin the Kerberos system (e.g., authentication system 104) by providingcredentials to the AS. The client may authenticate itself using, forexample, a KRB_AS_REQ message. Also during the AS Exchange step, the ASmay forward the credentials to the KDC, and the KDC may issue a TicketGranting Ticket (TGT) to the client. The KDC may issue the TGT using,for example, a KRB_AS_REP message. The KRB_AS_REP message may includethe TGT.

At the TGS Exchange step, the client may request from the KDC a serviceticket (ST) for a specific target service. The client may authenticateitself to TGS using the TGT. The client may authenticate itself using,for example, a KRB_TGS_REQ message. The KRB_TGS_REQ message may includethe TGT. Also at the TGS Exchange step, the client may receive therequested ST from the TGS. The TGS may issue the ST using, for example,a KRB_TGS_REP message.

During the CS Exchange step, the client may provide the ST to the targetservice, which in turn may provide access to the client. The client mayprovide the ST to the target service using, for example, a KRB_AP_REQmessage. The KRB_AP_REQ message may include the ST. In some cases, thetarget service may authenticate itself to the client using, for example,a KRB_AP_REP message.

While the foregoing provides an example of a computer network system 100operating according to the Kerberos protocol, it will be understood thatthe computer network system 100 may be configured to operate accordingto other authentication protocols as well, as described above.

Detection system 108 may be configured to detect potentially maliciousactivity in computer network system 100. In some embodiments, forexample, detection system 108 may be configured to detect whether anauthentication message generated and/or exchanged in computer networksystem 100 is indicative of potentially malicious activity in network112. Potentially malicious activity, as referred to herein, may include,for example, any activity that indicates, suggests, or makes possible anattack, a potential attack, or any other actual or potentiallyillegitimate activity in the computer network. Potentially maliciousactivity is not limited to activity that is actually illegitimate;rather, activity, say in the form of suspicious activity or anomalousactivity, that merely suggests a likelihood of illegitimate activity,may be potentially malicious activity as well. Moreover, maliciousactivity is not limited to activity characterized as an attack; rather,any illegitimate activity in the computer network may be included.

Detection system 108 may be configured to collect authenticationmessages generated and/or exchanged in computer network system 100 andextract data from the authentication messages. Detection system 108 maycollect authentication messages in many ways. In some embodiments, forexample, detection system 108 may monitor traffic in and/or out ofauthentication system 104; traffic in and/or out of client 102; trafficin and/or out of service providing system 106, and logs provided by anyof client 102, authentication system 104, and service providing system106. In some embodiments, detection system 108 may collectauthentication messages by monitoring one or more of client 102,authentication system 104, and service providing system 106.Alternatively or additionally, detection system 108 may collectauthentication messages using sensors or sniffers distributed in network112. Detection system 108 may collect authentication messages in othermanners as well.

Detection system 108 may be further configured to detect anomalousactivity by analyzing the messages communicated in network 112, asdescribed in more detail below. Detection system 108 may be centralized,as shown in FIG. 1, or may be distributed within network 112. Exampledetection systems are further described below in connection with FIGS.11, 13, and 15.

As noted above, an example computer network authentication protocol isKerberos, which typically employs three parties: a client, a targetservice, and a Kerberos system. In some embodiments, potentiallymalicious activity detected in a computer network system operatingaccording the Kerberos protocol, and/or other protocols, may include,for example, the Golden Ticket Attack, the Silver Ticket Attack, theMS14-068 Exploitation Attack (sometimes referred to as the PrivilegeAttribute Certificate (PAC) Attack), the Pass-the-Ticket Attack, whichcan be implemented for both TGTs and STs, and the Overpass-the-HashAttack. Each of these attacks is described in detail below. Othermalicious activity is possible as well.

Although some embodiments described herein are directed to detectingpotentially malicious activity in a network operating according to theKerberos protocol, this description is not intended to be limiting tosuch networks. In other embodiments, the disclosed systems and methodsmay be used in networks operating according to authentication protocolsother than Kerberos as well, such as authentication protocols that usemessaging to request and obtain tickets or tokens, possibly encrypted,for use in authentication and/or accessing of services.

Remediation system 110 may be configured to prevent, mitigate, and/orreverse the potentially malicious activity detected in network 112 bydetection system 108. In some embodiments, remediation system 110 may beconfigured to perform and/or cause to be performed one or more controlactions in connection with one or more network accounts. Control actionsmay be actions taken to prevent, mitigate, and/or reverse thepotentially malicious activity. Example remediation systems aredescribed below in connection with FIGS. 16, 17A-17C, and 19.

Network 112 may be any type of network configured to providecommunications between components of computer network system 100. Forexample, network 112 may be any type of network (includinginfrastructure) that provides communications, exchanges information,and/or facilitates the exchange of information, such as (all or portionsof) the Internet or another Wide Area Network, a Local Area Network, anear field communication (NFC) network, an optical code scanner network,or any other suitable connection(s) that enables the sending andreceiving of information between the components of system 100. As usedherein, sending and receiving are understood to have broad meanings,including sending or receiving in response to a specific request orwithout such a specific request. These terms thus cover both activeforms, and passive forms, of sending and receiving. In otherembodiments, one or more components of system 100 may communicatedirectly through a dedicated communication link(s).

In some embodiments, one or more of computer network 100, client 102,authentication system 104, service providing system 106, detectionsystem 108, remediation system 110, and network 112 may be implementedin whole or in part using cloud-based, on-demand, or otherInternet-enabled computing. For instance, the functions of client 102,authentication system 104, service providing system 106, detectionsystem 108, remediation system 110, and/or network 112 may, in someembodiments, be provided as cloud-based, on-demand, or otherInternet-enabled services accessible over an Internet connection. Insome embodiments, communicative coupling among client 102,authentication system 104, service providing system 106, detectionsystem 108, remediation system 110, and/or network 112 may be via anInternet connection.

FIG. 2 is an example ticket 200 for use in an authentication protocol,in accordance with disclosed embodiments. In some embodiments, ticket200 may be, for example, a ticket defined by the Kerberos protocol.Other authentication protocols, including other authentication protocolsthat use messaging to request and obtain tickets or tokens, possiblyencrypted, for use in authentication and/or accessing of services, arepossible as well.

As shown, ticket 200 includes both a non-encrypted portion 202 and anencrypted portion 204. Non-encrypted portion 202 may contain, forexample, metadata. As shown, encrypted portion 204 includes sub-portion206, which may include fields containing values defined by theauthentication protocol, such as the Kerberos protocol.

As shown, encrypted portion 204 further includes sub-portion 208, whichmay include authorization data elements. For example, as shown,sub-portion 208 includes authorization data elements AD-IF-RELEVANT.Expanded element 210 of sub-portion 208, as shown, is a PAC(AD-Win2k-PAC), which may specify the ad-type value (as shown, 128).Sub-portion 208 may further include sub-portion 212 which, as shown,includes data buffers inside the PAC. Sub-portion 208 may still furtherinclude data buffer 214, as shown.

Malicious activity in a network operating according to theauthentication protocol may take the form of, for example, ticketscontaining forged data. Forged data may appear in any of sub-portions206, 208, 210, 212, or 214. In some embodiments, for example, ticket 200may contain a forgery of the PAC within the Logon Info (1) data buffer214, as shown. Such forged data in tickets may be detected using thesystems and/or methods described herein.

Kerberos tickets, like ticket 200, may be transmitted in a network andmay be encrypted. Thus it may not be possible to retrieve the actualtickets without knowing the encryption keys, which may solely reside onthe participating endpoints. However, it may be possible to observe thetickets in the traffic in their encrypted form as a character stringknown as an encrypted ticket string (ETS) or “blob.”

Due to the structure of Kerberos messaging, it is possible to isolatethe ETS within the message stream. In some situations it is alsopossible to identify data associated with the ticket, such as aninternet protocol (IP) address from which the ticket request originated.By comparing the ETS of a new ticket to the ETSs of legitimate ticketsit is possible to identify whether the new ticket is a known, legitimateticket. Additional information may be gathered by analyzing the contentof other Kerberos-related communications, such as ticket requests sentto the KDC and KDC responses to these requests. ETSs and otherinformation may be used to detect potentially malicious activity in acomputer network (e.g., network 112).

Potentially malicious activity, as referred to herein, may include, forexample, any activity that indicates, suggests, or makes possible anattack, a potential attack, or other actual or potentially illegitimateactivity in the computer network. Potentially malicious activity is notlimited to activity that is actually illegitimate; rather, activity, sayin the form of suspicious activity or anomalous activity, that merelysuggests a likelihood of illegitimate activity, may be potentiallymalicious activity as well.

FIG. 3 is a flow chart illustrating an example method 300 for detectingpotentially malicious activity in a computer network (e.g., network112), in accordance with disclosed embodiments. In some embodiments, thecomputer network may operate according to the Kerberos protocol or anynumber of other authentication protocols that use messaging to requestand obtain tickets or tokens, possibly encrypted, for use inauthentication and/or accessing of services. Other authenticationprotocols are possible as well.

As shown, method 300 includes step 302 of receiving data associated witha plurality of authentication messages, where at least some of thereceived data includes secure ticket data. The authentication messagesmay, for example, have been communicated over a network.

Authentication messages, also referred to herein as secure tickets, maybe any messages exchanged between network entities in an authenticationprotocol. For example, in a computer network operating according to theKerberos protocol, authentication messages may include any ofKRB_AS_REQ, KRB_AS_REP, KRB_TGS_REQ, KRB_TGS_REP, KRB_AP_REQ, andKRB_AP_REQ messages. Other authentication messages, including those usedin other authentication protocols, such as other authenticationprotocols that use messaging to request and obtain tickets or tokens,possibly encrypted, for use in authentication and/or accessing ofservices, are possible as well.

Secure ticket data may be data included in an encrypted portion of asecure ticket. For example, in a Kerberos ticket, such as a TGT or anST, secure ticket data may be data included in an encrypted portion ofthe Kerberos ticket. As illustrated in FIG. 2, for example, secureticket data may be data included in the encrypted portion 204 of ticket200. Tickets or tokens, possible encrypted, for use in authenticationand/or accessing of services in any number of other authenticationprotocols that use messaging to request and obtain tickets or tokens arepossible as well.

In some embodiments, the data may be received in real-time. For example,the data from an authentication message may be received before theauthentication message is delivered to its recipient. Alternatively oradditionally, the authentication message may be obtained from a log orlist of messages communicated via the network. The data may be receivedin other manners as well.

In some embodiments, the received data may, for example, be extractedfrom the authentication messages. In some embodiments, the received datamay be stored in a repository. The received data may, for example, beassociated with the authentication message from which the data wasextracted. The data may be received in other manners as well.

In embodiments where the Kerberos protocol is used, the authenticationmessages may take the form of Kerberos messages communicated betweenclients, a Kerberos system, and target services. The authenticationmessages may include, for example, TGTs and/or STs issued by theKerberos system (such as by a KDC of the Kerberos system). As describedabove, a TGT may enable a client receiving the TGT to request an ST foraccessing a target service, and the ST may enable the client to accessthe target service.

In some embodiments, the authentication messages may include one or moreof a TGT request, such as a KRB_AS_REQ message; a response to a TGTrequest, such as a KRB_AS_REP message; an ST request, such as aKRB_TGS_REQ message; a response to an ST request, such as a KRB_TGS_REPmessage; and an access request that includes an ST, such as a KRB_AP_REQmessage.

Data associated with the authentication messages, also referred toherein as characteristics of data associated with authenticationmessages, may include, for example, one or more of a TGT; an ST; a flag;a PAC; a network address and/or a group of network addresses; a targetservice name; a client name; an encryption suite supported by anoriginator of the message; an origin of the message; a destination ofthe message; a time of transmission; and a message type. Alternativelyor additionally, data associated with the authentication messages mayinclude a target service for which a ticket is requested, a targetservice being accessed using a ticket, and a target service respondingto a request for access by a client using a ticket. Still alternativelyor additionally, data associated with the authentication messages mayinclude one or more of a client requesting an ST, a client requesting aTGT, a client accessing a target service using an ST, and a clientsending a ticket to an entity other than a target service. Other dataassociated with the authentication messages is possible as well.

Data associated with the authentication messages may be received in anumber of ways. In some embodiments, for example, data may be receivedby monitoring KDC data traffic; obtaining Kerberos message data fromsensors in the communication network; monitoring Kerberos messaging sentand received by a client; monitoring Kerberos messaging sent andreceived by a target service; and/or obtaining logs from a KDC, aclient, and/or a target service. Data may be received in other mannersas well.

The method 300, in some embodiments, includes step 304 of analyzing thereceived data associated with the plurality of authentication messages.At step 306, the method 300 may include determining, based on theanalyzing, a plurality of characteristics of the data associated withthe authentication messages.

The method 300, in some embodiments, includes step 308 of receiving dataassociated with a new authentication message communicated over thenetwork. As referred to herein, a new authentication message may besimilar to another authentication message, but may be received at adifferent (earlier or later) time. In some embodiments, the newauthentication message may be encrypted.

The method 300, in some embodiments, includes step 310 of determining aplurality of characteristics of the data associated with the newauthentication message. The various characteristics of authenticationmessages, which may be detected and analyzed, are described above.

The method 300, in some embodiments, includes step 312 of comparing adetermined characteristic of the new authentication message data with atleast one of: a determined characteristic of the plurality ofauthentication messages data, known valid data, and known invalid data.The known valid data, for example, may be data known to be validgenerally, or known to be valid in a particular network. In embodimentswhere the new authentication message is encrypted, for example, thecomparing may be based on encrypted data of the new authenticationmessage without first decrypting the encrypted data. In someembodiments, the comparing may include determining whether data from thenew authentication message matches data from the received data from theplurality of authentication messages. Alternatively or additionally, thecomparing may include determining whether data from the newauthentication message includes a flag that is not included in thereceived data from the plurality of authentication messages. Stillalternatively or additionally, the comparing may include determiningwhether an encryption type associated with the new authenticationmessage data matches an encryption type associated with the receiveddata from the plurality of authentication messages. The encryption typemay indicate, for example, an encryption scheme used to encrypt thesecure ticket data of the authentication message. Other encryptiontypes, including any description pertaining to the encryption, arepossible as well. Still alternatively or additionally, the comparing mayinclude determining whether the new authentication message data includesa ticket that is also included in the received data from the pluralityof authentication messages. Still alternatively or additionally, thecomparing may include determining whether the new authentication messagedata includes a ticket, identifying a machine from which the newauthentication message data originated, and ascertaining whether theticket was previously sent to the machine from which the newauthentication message originated. Other comparisons, including anyascertaining of similarities or differences between the authenticationmessage data and the new authentication message data, are possible aswell.

The method 300 includes step 314 of generating, based on the comparison,an assessment of whether the new authentication message is indicative ofthe potentially malicious activity in the network. The assessment, asreferred to herein, may be any determination or analysis of whether theauthentication message is indicative of the potentially maliciousactivity in the network. The assessment may be, for example, a binaryindication, such as forged or genuine, or may be a probabilityindication, such as a probability that the authentication message isindicative of the potentially malicious activity. Other assessments,including any valuation, diagnosis, or other description of the computernetwork and/or potentially malicious activity, are possible as well.

Generating the assessment may include, for example, performing aprotective false-positive detection operation to limit false-positiveindications from the potentially malicious activity indications. In someembodiments, the false-positive detection operation may involve, forexample, identifying an error message sent by a ticket issuer (such as aKDC of a Kerberos system) in response to a ticket request (such as a TGTor ST); identifying a ticket request sent from an unmonitored domain;and determining when an issued ticket is forwardable to another entity.The false-positive detection operation may take other forms as well.

Alternatively or additionally, generating the assessment may includedetermining whether the new authentication message data is associatedwith a potential attack in the network. Still alternatively oradditionally, generating the assessment may include determininginformation containing the potentially malicious activity. Theassessment may be generated in other manners as well.

In some embodiments, based on the assessment, a decision may be made ofwhether to transmit the new authentication message to the targetapplication. For example, this may involve accessing a proxy server orother server, implemented in the form of a dedicated computer, software,or any other computer. The proxy server or other server may beconfigured to intervene, or to intermediate, in the messagecommunication process. This may involve, for example, controllingcommunication of authentication messages between a client and a targetapplication. It may also involve intercepting authentication messages,either transparently or not from the client's (or target application's)perspective. Thus, in some situations the client and/or targetapplication may be unaware or not informed that potentially maliciousactivity has been identified. The proxy server or other server may beconfigured to block, accept, store, and/or forward authenticationmessages. These actions may be based on, for example, risk factors orrisk scenarios associated with determining indications of potentiallymalicious activity.

In other embodiments, a different computer component (e.g.,authentication system 104, service providing system 106, or detectionsystem 108) determines whether to transmit the new authenticationmessage to the target application. In such embodiments, a proxy servermay or may not be used.

In some embodiments, determining whether an authentication message couldbe forwarded (e.g., to a target application) may be based on theassessment made of whether an authentication message communicated overthe network is indicative of potentially malicious activity. Further,such determining might include determining whether to forward or notforward an authentication message based on different risk factors andrisk scenarios, some of which may be applicable to comply with thespecific implementing system environment.

As noted above, attacks involving the Kerberos protocol and/or otherprotocols may include, for example, a Golden Ticket Attack, SilverTicket Attack, MS14-068 Exploitation Attack (sometimes referred to asthe PAC Attack), Pass-the-Ticket Attack, which can be implemented forboth TGTs and STs, and Overpass-the-Hash Attack. Each of these exemplaryattacks is described in greater detail below.

Method 300 may be used to detect potentially malicious activityassociated with each of these types of attacks. In some embodiments,detection of these attacks may involve the receipt and analysis ofdifferent data associated with different authentication messages. Forexample, in some embodiments, detection of a Golden Ticket attack mayinvolve extracting TGTs from responses to TGT requests and storing theTGTs in the repository. Potentially malicious activity may be detectedwhen a TGT included in an authentication message is not stored in therepository. As another example, in some embodiments, detection of aSilver Ticket attack may involve extracting STs from responses to STrequests and storing the STs in the repository. Potentially maliciousactivity may be detected when an ST included in the obtained message isnot stored in the repository. As still another example, in detection ofa MS14-068 attack, potentially malicious activity may be detected when aTGT request includes flag to not include a PAC in the TGT request. Asyet another example, detection of a Pass-the-Ticket TGT attack mayinvolve extracting TGTs and the respective TGT requester from responsesto TGT requests. Potentially malicious activity may be detected when asender of a message including a TGT differs from the respectiverequester of the TGT. As still another example, detection of aPass-the-Ticket ST attack may involve extracting STs and the respectiveST requester from responses to TGT requests. Potentially maliciousactivity may be detected when a sender of a message including an STdiffers from the respective requester of the ST. And as yet anotherexample, detection of an Overpass-the-Hash attack may involve extractingencryption suite identifiers for respective Kerberos ticket requesters.Potentially malicious activity may be detected when the encryption suiteof a sender of a Kerberos message differs from the encryption suitepreviously recorded for the sender. Potentially malicious activity maybe detected in other manners and for other attacks as well.

In some embodiments, method 300 may be used to detect potentiallymalicious activity in real-time. Alternatively or additionally, in someembodiments, an alert may be issued when potentially malicious activityis detected.

In some embodiments, method 300 may further include identifying anetwork account associated with a sender of the received data associatedwith the new authentication message, and executing a responsive measurewith respect to the identified network account. As used herein, the termnetwork account may broadly include any local machine account, or anynetwork-defined or network-recognized account.

In some embodiments, such as those in which the computer networkoperates according to the Kerberos protocol, the plurality ofauthentication messages data may include, for example, informationregarding Kerberos TGT tickets issued by a KDC. Comparing a determinedcharacteristic of the new authentication message data with a determinedcharacteristic of the plurality of authentication message data mayinvolve, for example, checking whether any of the Kerberos TGT ticketsin the new authentication message data does not appear in plurality ofauthentication messages data. This may be useful, for instance, indetecting Golden Ticket attacks.

Alternatively or additionally, in some embodiments, the plurality ofauthentication messages data may include, for example, informationregarding Kerberos ST tickets issued by a KDC. Comparing a determinedcharacteristic of the new authentication message data with a determinedcharacteristic of the plurality of authentication message data mayinvolve, for example, checking whether any of the Kerberos ST tickets inthe new authentication message data does not appear in the plurality ofmessages authentication data. This may be useful, for instance, indetecting Silver Ticket attacks.

In some embodiments, such as those in which the computer networkoperates according to the Kerberos protocol, method 300 may furtherinclude checking the KDC_options flag of TGS_REQ messages in theplurality of authentication messages and indicating in the plurality ofauthentication messages data which TGTs were intended for renewal. Inthese embodiments, when a TGT is intended for renewal, the KDC responseto the renewal request can be checked. If the TGT request is rejected bythe KDC, potentially malicious activity is not detected.

In some embodiments, such as those in which the computer networkoperates according to the Kerberos protocol, comparing a determinedcharacteristic of the new authentication message data with a determinedcharacteristic of the plurality of authentication message data mayinvolve, for example, checking AS_REQ messages in the second newauthentication message data to determine whether the TGT is requestedwithout a PAC. If no PAC is requested, potentially malicious activitymay be detected and an alert may be issued. This may be useful, forinstance, in detecting MS14-068 attacks.

In some embodiments, the plurality of authentication messages data mayinclude, for example, information regarding all Kerberos TGTs issued bythe KDC. The Kerberos TGTs may include, for example, those found inAS_REP or TGS_REP messages. The plurality of authentication messagesdata may further include, for example, the respective requesting entityto which each TGT was sent. In these embodiments, comparing a determinedcharacteristic of the new authentication message data with a determinedcharacteristic of the plurality of authentication message data mayinvolve, for example, checking whether any of the Kerberos TGTs in thenew authentication message data, such as in a TGS_REQ message, does notcome from the requesting entity to which it was sent according to theplurality of authentication messages data. This may be useful, forinstance, in detecting Pass-the-Ticket TGT attacks.

In some embodiments, the plurality of authentication messages data mayinclude, for example, information regarding all Kerberos STs issued bythe KDC. For example, the plurality of authentication messages data mayinclude Kerberos STs found in TGS_REP messages. The plurality ofauthentication messages data may further include, for example, therespective requesting entity to which each ST was issued. In theseembodiments, comparing a determined characteristic of the newauthentication message data with a determined characteristic of theplurality of authentication message data may involve, for example,checking whether any of the Kerberos ST tickets in the newauthentication message data, such as ST tickets found in AP_REQmessages, does not come from the machine to which it was issuedaccording to the plurality of authentication messages data. This may beuseful, for instance, in detecting Pass-the-Ticket ST attacks.

In some embodiments, the method 300 may further include checking theKDC_options flag of TGS_REQ messages in the plurality of authenticationmessages and indicating in the plurality of authentication messages datawhich TGTs were intended for delegation. In these embodiments, if theTGT was intended for delegation, no potentially malicious activity maybe detected when the TGT is found in the new authentication messagedata.

In some embodiments, the method 300 may further include checking theKDC_options flag of TGS_REQ messages in the plurality of authenticationmessages and indicating in the plurality of authentication messages datawhich STs were intended for delegation. In these embodiments, if the STwas intended for delegation, no potentially malicious activity may bedetected when the ST is found in the new authentication message data.

In some embodiments, the plurality of authentication messages data maycontain information regarding the encryption suites for AS_REQ messagesand an indication of the respective encryption suites supported by eachrequesting entity in the network. In these embodiments, comparing adetermined characteristic of the new authentication message data with adetermined characteristic of the plurality of authentication messagesdata may involve checking whether the encryption suite in an AS_REQmessage for a specific requesting entity in the new authenticationmessage data is different from the encryption suite in the plurality ofauthentication messages data for the requesting entity. A difference inencryption suites may indicate, for instance, an Overpass-the-Hashattack.

Reference is now made to FIG. 4, which is a flow chart illustrating anexample method 400 for detecting potentially malicious activity in acomputer network, in accordance with some embodiments. The method 400may, for example, be used in a computer network operating according tothe Kerberos protocol or any number of other authentication protocolsthat use messaging to request and obtain tickets or tokens, possiblyencrypted, for use in authentication and/or accessing of targetservices.

In some embodiments, data associated with authentication messages thatis retrieved, for example as described above in connection with method300, may be stored in a repository as a string of characters, known asan ETS or blob. In particular, for example, data may be extracted fromauthentication messages, as described above in connection with method300. The extracted data may, for example, identify a Kerberos ticket,such as a TGT or an ST, or a ticket or token used in any number of otherauthentication protocols that use messaging to request and obtaintickets or tokens, possibly encrypted, for use in authentication and/oraccessing of target services.

In some embodiments, an ETS associated with the extracted data may bestored in the repository. Alternatively or additionally, in someembodiments, a hash of the ETS may be stored. Such a hash may be, forexample, an MD5 hash. Other hashes, including any other algorithm,process, or cryptographic value, are possible as well. The ETS may takeother forms as well.

In a computer network operating the Kerberos protocol, data may becollected by monitoring traffic in the computer network. For example,traffic may be monitored to and from the KDC, such as KRB_AS_REQ andKRB_AS_REP messages exchanged during the AS Exchange step or KRB_TGS_REQand KRB_TGS_REP message exchanged during the TGS Exchange step; andbetween endpoints, such as KRB_AP_REQ and KRB_AP_REP messages exchangedduring the CS Exchange step. Observing messages exchanged during the CSExchange step may include, for example, parsing various protocols thatuse Kerberos for authentication, such as File Transfer Protocol (FTP),Structured Query Language (SQL), Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP), ServerMessage Block (SMB) Protocol, Common Internet File System (CIFS), andHypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP). Other protocols, including any otherapplication protocol, are possible as well

As shown, in some embodiments the method 400 includes step 402 ofretrieving ETS identifying data associated with a plurality ofauthentication messages. The authentication messages may be, forexample, Kerberos messages or other types of messages.

The method 400 includes step 404 of creating a mapping for some or allretrieved ETSs. The mapping may indicate, for example, an origin,destination, time of transmission, and message type for anauthentication message from which data identified by the ETS wasextracted. The mapping may involve, for example, creating a file or adatabase table for each message type. For a computer network operatingthe Kerberos protocol, for instance, the message types may includeKRB_AS_REQ, KRB_AS_REP, KRB_TGS_REQ, KRB_TGS_REP, KRB_AP_REQ, andKRB_AP_REP. Other message types, including any message transmitted,received, or stored in connection with an authentication protocol, arepossible as well. Details for each ETS may be stored in the file ordatabase table that corresponds to the appropriate message type. In someembodiments, as noted above, ETSs may be stored as a hash of the ETS.Storing ETSs as hashes may, in some embodiments, serve to reduce a sizeof the mapping.

The method 400, in some embodiments, includes step 406, which mayinclude performing checks to detect potentially malicious activity. Thechecks may take several forms.

In some embodiments, for example, a check may involve, for some or allETSs that are not from an AS_REP or TGS_REP message (for example, blobsfrom TGS_REQ or AP_REQ messages), determining whether a stored ETSmatches an ETS that was previously sent in an AS_REP or a TGS_REPmessage.

As another example, in some embodiments, a check may involve determiningwhether some or all ETSs represent a Kerberos ticket that was sent fromthe KDC of the Kerberos system. As every Kerberos ticket sent on thecomputer network should have been legitimately generated by the KDC, anETS that does not represent a Kerberos ticket sent from the KDC in anAS_REP or a TGS_REP message may be considered forged, illegitimate,and/or potentially malicious. Other checks may be performed as well.

The method 400, in some embodiments, includes step 408 of, in responseto detecting potentially malicious activity, issuing an alert. The alertmay be, for example, a message provided to, for instance, anadministrator, such as a pop-up message on a graphical user interfacefor presentation to the administrator, or a message otherwisecommunicated to the administrator. Other alerts or indications providedto other parties or entities are possible as well.

In some embodiments, a computer readable medium may include computerexecutable instructions adapted to perform the methods of one or more ofFIGS. 3 and 4. Alternatively or additionally, in some embodiments, themethods of FIGS. 3 and 4 and/or related systems may be implemented, forexample, on a network-connected device that monitors networkcommunications; as a software module on the KDC; and/or as softwaremodules (or agents) on machines in the network. The methods and/orsystems may be implemented in other manners as well.

FIGS. 5A-5B illustrate an example method 500 for detecting a GoldenTicket Attack, and associated collected data, in accordance withdisclosed embodiments. The term “Golden Ticket” refers to a TGT that wasnot generated by a legitimate KDC. This may be achieved by the attackersstealing a secret from the KDC (such as Microsoft Active Directory®),which enables them to create and/or cryptographically sign tickets whichwill be recognized as legitimate by services in the network.

FIG. 5A is a simplified flowchart of an example method 500 for detectinga Golden Ticket attack, according to disclosed embodiments. Method 500may, for example, be performed by authentication system 104, serviceproviding system 106, detection system 108, and/or remediation system110, as described above in connection with FIG. 1. FIG. 5B is a screencapture showing example Kerberos message fields from which data requiredfor the instant method may be extracted. An example Golden Ticket attackis described with reference to FIGS. 5A and 5B.

When a TGS_REQ is observed from machine X with a TGT that was not sentto machine X in a previous AS_REP or TGS_REP, this may be an indicationof potentially malicious activity. If the TGT has not been seen anywherebefore, the TGT is probably a Golden Ticket.

In some embodiments, the method 500 may include step 502 of collectingAS_REP, TG_REQ, and/or TGS_REP messages. Other messages may be collectedas well.

In some embodiments, the method 500 may include step 504 where AS_REPand TGS_REP messages, including TGT and ST tickets, may be stored in,for example, a repository.

The method 500 may include, in some embodiments, step 506 where, for allor some TGS_REQ messages, the repository may be checked to determinewhether the ticket included in the TGS_REQ exists in the repository. Ifnot, the ticket included in the TGS_REQ may be deemed a Golden Ticket,and, at step 508, an alert on a Golden Ticket may be issued. If, on theother hand, the ticket in the TGS_REQ is determined to exist in therepository, the method 500 may include step 510 and no alert may beissued.

In some embodiments, in order to eliminate false positive cases, one ormore of optional checks may be performed, as shown in FIG. 5A. Theseoptional checks may include, for example, a KDC response check, shown asstep 512, a domain check, shown as step 514, and a ticket renewal check,shown as step 516.

In a KDC response check, shown at step 512, the KDC may check any TGT itreceives along with the TGS_REQ message. When the KDC response to aTGS_REQ message is an error message, no alert may be issued. Such a casemay arise when, for example, a requesting entity sends the KDC anexpired or malformed ticket. If the KDC response is valid (TGS_REP), analert may be issued and/or further checks may be executed.

A domain check, shown at step 514, may determine whether the domain inwhich a Kerberos ticket has been issued is unmonitored. Kerberos issuedtickets may be used to access resources across different domains. Insuch a case, if the monitoring does not cover all domains, ticketsissued by the domain controllers of unmonitored domains may be ignoredin order to avoid false positive alerts. The domain in which the tickethas been issued may be specified under the realm field within theKerberos ticket request.

A ticket renewal check, shown at step 516, may determine whether aKerberos ticket is expired. When a Kerberos ticket is about to expire, arenewed ticket may be requested by the requesting entity (renewalrequest initiation may vary according to the operating system). In somecases, the requesting entity will attempt to renew an expired ticketwhich was issued prior to the initiation of the network monitoring. Inorder to eliminate false positive alerts due to such cases, the KDCresponse to the renewal request may be observed. If the KDC accepts therequest, the ETS may be validated, as described above. If the KDCrejects the request due to the usage of expired ticket, the ETS may beignored.

In some embodiments, it may further be checked whether there is asubsequent successful TGS_REP. If so, this may be especiallyproblematic, as it means the attack was successful in using a forged TGTto generate an ST.

FIGS. 6A-6B illustrate an example method 600 for detecting aPass-the-Ticket Attack that uses a TGT, in accordance with disclosedembodiments. In a Pass-the-Ticket attack, the attacker may pass alegitimate ticket, which was issued by the KDC to a first machine, to asecond machine. In this manner, the second machine may be in possessionof a legitimate ticket, even though it might not have the appropriatecredentials to obtain the ticket itself. A Pass-the-Ticket attack may beperformed for either of a TGT and an ST.

In a Pass-the-Ticket TGT attack the attacker takes a valid TGT fromnetwork machine X and uses it on network machine Y. Usually, machine Ydid not have the proper original credentials to successfully completethe Authentication Service Exchange, and did not legitimately receivethe TGT from the KDC. The Pass-the-Ticket TGT attack enables theattacker to request STs from machine Y.

FIG. 6A is a simplified flowchart of an example method 600 for detectinga Pass-the-Ticket TGT attack, according to disclosed embodiments. Method600 may, for example, be performed by authentication system 104, serviceproviding system 106, detection system 108, and/or remediation system110, as described above in connection with FIG. 1. FIG. 6B is a screencapture showing example Kerberos message fields from which data requiredfor the instant method is extracted. An example Pass-the-Ticket TGTattack is described with reference to FIGS. 6A and 6B.

When a TGS_REQ is observed from machine Y with a TGT that was not sentto it in a previous AS_REP, this may indicate a potential attack. If theTGT was seen going to another machine X in AS_REP, for example, this maybe a potential Pass-the-Ticket TGT attack.

In some embodiments, the method 600 may include step 602 of collectingAS_REP, TG_REQ, and/or TGS_REP messages. Other messages may be collectedas well.

In some embodiments, the method 600 may include step 604 where AS_REPand TGS_REP messages, including TGT and ST tickets, may be stored in,for example, a repository.

In some embodiments, the method 600 may include step 606 where, for someor all TGS_REQ messages, the repository may be checked to determinewhether the ticket included in the TGS_REQ message matches the ticket ofa TGS_REP or AS_REP message stored in the repository. If not, the method600 may include step 608 where an alert on a Pass-the-Ticket TGT attackmay be issued. If, on the other hand, the ticket in the TGS_REQ isdetermined to match that in the repository, the method 600 may includestep 610 where no alert may be issued, and the TGS_REQ may be determinedto be valid.

It should be noted that there may be an option in Kerberos-authenticatednetworks to “delegate” tickets, that is, tickets may legitimately beissued for a specific source but used by another. Thesedelegation-intended tickets may be identified by the “FORWARDED” or“PROXY” flag in the TGS_REQ message. Accordingly, in some embodiments,in order to prevent false positive alerts, the method 600 may includestep 612 where it may be checked whether a “FORWARDED” or “PROXY” flagis included in the TGS_REQ message.

FIGS. 7A-7B illustrate an example method 700 for detecting aPass-the-Ticket Attack that uses an ST, and related collected data, inaccordance with disclosed embodiments. In a Pass-the-Ticket ST attack,the attacker takes a valid ST from network machine X and uses it onnetwork machine Y. Usually, this machine Y did not have the properoriginal credentials to successfully complete the AS Exchange, nor didit legitimately use a valid TGT to complete the TGS Exchange, and thusdid not legitimately receive the ST from the KDC. This attack may enablethe attacker to use the ST to access a specific network service forwhich the ST was generated.

FIG. 7A is a simplified flowchart of an example method 700 for detectinga Pass-the-Ticket ST attack, according to disclosed embodiments. Method700 may, for example, be performed by authentication system 104, serviceproviding system 106, detection system 108, and/or remediation system110, as described above in connection with FIG. 1. FIG. 7B is a screencapture showing the Kerberos message fields from which data required forthe instant method may be extracted. An example Pass-the-Ticket STattack is described with reference to FIGS. 7A and 7B.

If an AP_REQ is observed from machine Y with an ST that was not sent toit in a previous TGS_REP, then this may be a Pass-the-Ticket ST attack.If the ST was seen going to another machine X in TGS_REP, this may be aPass-the-Ticket ST.

As shown in FIG. 7A, the method 700 may include step 702 of collectingAS_REP, TG_REQ, and/or TGS_REP messages. Other messages may be collectedas well.

In some embodiments, the method 700 may include step 704 where AS_REPand TGS_REP messages, including TGT and ST tickets, may be stored in,for example, a repository.

In some embodiments, the method 700 may include step 706 where, for someor all TGS_REQ messages, the repository may be checked to determinewhether the ticket included in the TGS_REQ message matches the ticket ofa TGS_REP or AS_REP message stored in the repository. If not, the method700 may include step 708 where an alert on a Pass-the-Ticket ST attackmay be issued. If, on the other hand, the ticket in the TGS_REQ isdetermined to match that in the repository, the method 700 may includestep 710 where no alert may be issued, and the TGS_REQ may be determinedto be valid.

As noted above, there may be an option in Kerberos-authenticatednetworks to “delegate” tickets, that is, tickets may legitimately beissued for a specific source but used by another. Thesedelegation-intended tickets may be identified by the “FORWARDED” or“PROXY” flag in the TGS_REQ message. Accordingly, in some embodiments,in order to prevent false positive alerts, the method 700 may includestep 712 where it may be checked whether a “FORWARDED” or “PROXY” flagis included in the TGS_REQ message.

FIGS. 8A-8B illustrate an example method 800 for detecting a PAC Attack,and related collected data, in accordance with disclosed embodiments. APAC attack, also known as an MS14-068 Exploitation attack, may exploit aMicrosoft® vulnerability MS14-068 by assigning an illegitimate PAC to aKerberos ticket. The PAC is an extension element of theauthorization-data field contained in the client's Kerberos ticket. Itcontains information such as security identifiers, group membership andmore.

The PAC attack may be performed on a TGT. It may enable the attacker tocreate a new TGT that states in its PAC domain groups' assignments thatare different than those in the legitimate TGT generated by the KDC.This may effectively change the privileges of the TGT, thereby givingthe user higher levels of access to target services. Thus, an attackerusing standard user credentials may request and receive a legitimate TGTfor a user, then change the PAC to gain higher privileges (such as thoseof domain administrator).

FIG. 8A is a simplified flowchart of an example method 800 for detectinga PAC attack, according to disclosed embodiments. Method 800 may, forexample, be performed by authentication system 104, service providingsystem 106, detection system 108, and/or remediation system 110, asdescribed above in connection with FIG. 1. FIG. 8B is a screen captureshowing the Kerberos message fields from which data required for theinstant method 800 may be extracted. An example PAC attack is describedwith reference to FIGS. 8A and 8B.

In some embodiments, the method 800 may include step 802 of collectingAS_REP and/or TGS_REQ messages. Other messages may be collected as well.

In some embodiments, the method 800 may include step 804 where it maythen be determined whether an AS_REQ message exists that includes aspecial flag (PAC: false) that directs the KDC to provide a TGT with noPAC. This scenario indicates an attempt to create a TGT that will laterbe altered by the attacker with a non-legitimate PAC. If so, the method800 may include step 806 where an alert on a PAC attack may be issued.If not, the method 800 may include step 808 where no alert may beissued, and the AS_REP may be determined to be valid.

FIGS. 9A-9B illustrate an example method 900 for detecting a SilverTicket Attack, and related collected data, in accordance with disclosedembodiments. In a Silver Ticket attack, the attacker may change theKerberos ST PAC. The attack may enable the attacker to obtain different(typically higher) privileges than those granted in the legitimate STgenerated by the KDC. This is achieved, for example, by changing thedomain groups from those which were present in the legitimate TGT usedto obtain the ST. This may effectively change the privileges of the ST,enabling higher levels of access to target services. This Silver Ticketattack enables an attacker using standard user credentials to requestand receive a legitimate TGT for a user, to use the TGT to request andreceive a legitimate ST, and then to change the PAC in the legitimate STto gain higher privileges (e.g., those of domain administrator) foroperations on the target service.

FIG. 9A is a simplified flowchart of an example method 900 for detectinga Silver Ticket attack, according to disclosed embodiments. Method 900may, for example, be performed by authentication system 104, serviceproviding system 106, detection system 108, and/or remediation system110, as described above in connection with FIG. 1. FIG. 9B is a screencapture showing the Kerberos message fields from which data required forthe instant method may be extracted. An example Silver Ticket attack isdescribed with reference to FIGS. 9A and 9B.

If an AP_REQ is observed from machine Y with an ST that was not sent toit in a previous TGS_REP, this may indicate potentially maliciousactivity. If the ST was not seen going to another machine in TGS_REP,this may be a Silver Ticket attack.

In some embodiments, the method 900 may include step 902 of collectingTGS_REP and/or AP_REQ messages. Other messages may be collected as well.

In some embodiments, the method 900 may include step 904 where TGS_REPmessages, including TGT and ST tickets, may be stored in, for example, arepository.

In some embodiments, the method 900 may include step 906 where, for someor all AP_REQ messages, the repository may be checked to determinewhether the ticket included in the AP_REQ message matches the ticket ofa TGS_REP message stored in the repository. If not, the method 900 mayinclude step 908 where an alert on a Silver Ticket attack may be issued.If, on the other hand, the ticket in the AP_REQ is determined to matchthat in the repository, the method 900 may include step 910 where noalert may be issued, and the AP_REQ may be determined to be valid.

When a Kerberos ticket is about to expire, a renewed ticket may berequested by the requesting entity (renewal request initiation may varyaccording to the operating system). In some cases, the requesting entitymay attempt renewing an expired ticket which was issued prior to theinitiation of the network monitoring. In order to eliminate falsepositive alerts due to such cases, the KDC response to the renewalrequest may be observed. If the KDC accepts the request, the ETS shouldbe validated as described above. If the KDC rejects the request due tothe usage of expired ticket, the ETS may be ignored.

In some embodiments, the method 900 may include step 912 where the KDCmay check any TGT it receives along with the TGS_REQ message. When theKDC response to a TGS_REQ message is an error message, no alert may beissued. Such a case may arise when a requesting entity sends the KDC anexpired or malformed ticket. If the KDC response is valid (TGS_REP),either an alert may be issued or further optional checks may beperformed.

As noted above, in a Silver Ticket attack, the attacker may change theKerberos ST PAC in order to obtain higher privileges within the network.The ST PAC may, in some embodiments, include two verification valuesthat may be validated in order to detect a Silver Ticket Attack. Theverification values may be calculated using, for example, cryptographickeys.

For example, in some embodiments, the ST PAC may include each of atarget service checksum, calculated using a target service key, and aKDC checksum, calculated using a Krbtgt key. For example, as shown inFIG. 20A, the ST PAC 2000 may include target service checksum 2002 andKDC checksum 2004. As another example, as shown in FIG. 20B, the ST PAC2006 may include target service checksum 2008 and KDC checksum 2010. ThePAC, target service checksum, and KDC checksum may take other forms aswell, and other verification values and other cryptographic keys arepossible as well.

During operation of an authentication protocol, the verification valuesmay each be validated. For example, one or more verification values maybe validated by a service providing system, while one or more otherverification values may be validated by an authentication system,credentialing system, and/or remediation system, as described above inconnection with FIGS. 1, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17A-17C, and 19. For example, atarget service checksum may, for example, be validated by a serviceproviding system, while a KDC checksum may be validated by anauthentication system. Validation of the KDC checksum, sometimesreferred to as “PAC Validation,” may, in some embodiments, be optional.

In some instances, an attacker may have only one of the two (or more)cryptographic keys. For example, an attacker may have the target servicekey used to calculate the target service checksum, but may not have theKrbtgt key used to calculate the KDC checksum. In these instances, whena Silver Ticket attack is carried out, the attacker may properlycalculate and modify one verification value, but not the other. Forexample, the attacker may properly calculate and modify the targetservice checksum using the target service key. Without the Krbtgt key,however, the attacker may be unable to properly calculate and modify theKDC checksum.

Accordingly, in some embodiments, a Silver Ticket Attack may be detectedby validating both verification values using the cryptographic keys. Acryptographic key may be obtained, and the verification values may becalculated based on the cryptographic key and decrypted data elementsfrom the received secure ticket. By comparing the verification values tocorresponding values in the secure ticket, a Silver Ticket Attack may bedetected. For example, a Silver Ticket Attack may be detected byretrieving each of the target service key and the Krbtgt key, decryptingthe received ticket, and calculating each of the target service checksumand the KDC checksum using the decrypted data, the target service key,and the Krbtgt key. A mismatch between the received KDC checksum and thecalculated KDC checksum may indicate that potentially malicious activityhas been detected.

For example, in some embodiments a KDC may issue a legitimate tickethaving an encrypted PAC containing (X, H(X,K1), H(H(X,K1),K2)). X may bedata elements including, for example, group memberships or otherinformation indicating authorization to access target services. K1 maybe a target service key, such that H(X,K1) may be a target servicechecksum, calculated from the data X using the target service key K1.Similarly, K2 may be a Krbtgt key, such that H(H(X,K1),K2) may be a KDCchecksum, calculated from the target service checksum H(X,K1) using theKrbtgt key K2.

In some instances, an attacker conducting a Silver Ticket Attack maymodify the data X to data X′ offering enhanced access to the attacker.Where the attacker has the target service key K1, the attacker mayproperly calculate a target service checksum H(X′,K1) using the targetservice key K1. Without the Krbtgt key K2, however, the attacker may beunable to properly calculate the KDC checksum H(H(X′,K1),K2).Accordingly, in some embodiments, a Silver Ticket Attack may be detectedby retrieving each of the target service key K1 and the Krbtgt key K2,decrypting the received ticket, and calculating each of the targetservice checksum H(X′,K1) and the KDC checksum H(H(X′,K1),K2) using thedecrypted data, the target service key K1, and the Krbtgt key K2. Amismatch between the received KDC checksum and the calculated KDCchecksum may indicate that potentially malicious activity has beendetected.

FIGS. 10A-10B illustrate an example method 1000 for detecting anOverpass-the-Hash Attack, and related collected data, in accordance withdisclosed embodiments. In a legitimate authentication workflow, such asan AS_REQ/AS_REP exchange, the client may provide a password for whichseveral authenticators (such as hash values) are calculated. The clientmay then declare the encryption types that the client supports, and theKDC may choose one of them (usually the strongest one) for theauthentication.

In an Overpass-the-Hash attack, the attacker uses a hash that has beenobtained in order to successfully complete the AS_REQ/AS_REP messagetransaction and receive a legitimate TGT without knowing the actualpassword. The attacker's challenge may be that, without the actualpassword, it is possible that he will not have all the possibleauthenticators (hash values). If the attacker were to declare all theencryption types that would be declared in a legitimate authenticationworkflow, the KDC may choose an encryption type that the attacker doesnot have the authenticator for and the attacker's authentication willfail. To avoid this, the attacker may change the encryption typedeclaration and only declare the encryption types for which he has theauthenticator, forcing the KDC to choose one of them.

FIG. 10A is a simplified flowchart of an example method 1000 fordetecting an Overpass-the-Hash attack, according to disclosedembodiments. Method 1000 may, for example, be performed byauthentication system 104, service providing system 106, detectionsystem 108, and/or remediation system 110, as described above inconnection with FIG. 1. FIG. 10B is a screen capture showing theKerberos message fields from which data required for the instant methodmay be extracted. An example Overpass-the-Hash attack is described withreference to FIGS. 10A and 10B. In some embodiments, the method 1000 mayinclude step 1002 of collecting AS_REQ messages. Other messages may becollected as well.

In some embodiments, the method 1000 may include step 1004 whereencryption types included in the AS_REQ messages may be extracted andstored in, for example, a repository.

In some embodiments, the method 1000 may include step 1006 where, forsome or all AS_REQ messages, the repository may be checked to determinewhether the encryption types included in the TGS_REQ message match theencryption types of an AS_REQ message stored in the repository. If not,the method 1000 may include step 1008 where an alert on anOverpass-the-Hash attack may be issued. If, on the other hand, theencryption types in the AS_REQ are determined to match those in therepository, the method 1000 may include step 1010 where no alert may beissued, and the AS_REQ may be determined to be valid.

FIG. 11 is a block diagram of an example detection system 1100, inaccordance with disclosed embodiments. Detection system 1100 may beconfigured to detect potentially malicious activity in a computernetwork. In some embodiments, for example, detection system 1100 may beconfigured to detect whether an authentication message generated and/orexchanged in a computer network (e.g., network 112, from FIG. 1) isindicative of potentially malicious activity in the network. Detectionsystem 1100 may, for example, be similar to detection system 108described above in connection with FIG. 1. Additionally, oralternatively, detection system 1100 may be implemented byauthentication system 104, service providing system 106, detectionsystem 108, and/or remediation system 110, as described above inconnection with FIG. 1.

Potentially malicious activity, as referred to herein, may include, forexample, any activity that indicates, suggests, or makes possible anattack, a potential attack, or other actual or potentially illegitimateactivity in the computer network. Potentially malicious activity is notlimited to activity that is actually illegitimate; rather, activity, sayin the form of suspicious activity or anomalous activity, that merelysuggests a likelihood of illegitimate activity may be potentiallymalicious activity as well.

As shown, detection system 1100 may include a processor 1102, a memory1104, and, in some embodiments, a network interface 1106. Memory 1104may include receiving system 1108, model generating system 1110,repository 1112, analysis system 1114, and alerting system 1116. In someembodiments, receiving system 1108, model generating system 1110,repository 1112, analysis system 1114, and alerting system 1116 mayinclude instructions, executable by processor 1102, to carry out one ormore processes for detecting potentially malicious activity.

Receiving system 1108 may include instructions, executable by processor1102, that configure detection system 1100 to collect Kerberos messagesor other types of messages communicated over a network. In someembodiments, receiving system 1108 may be configured to receive dataassociated with a plurality of authentication messages, as describedabove in connection with any of the foregoing methods. The received datamay include, for example, secure ticket data.

Model generating system 1110 may include instructions, executable byprocessor 1102, that configure detection system 1100 to extract datarelevant to detecting attacks from the collected authenticationmessages, and repository 1112 may be configured to store the extracteddata as plurality of authentication messages data, as described above inconnection with any of the preceding methods. Repository 1112 may be,for example, a memory device, database, disk, external memory or anyother type of memory or data storage element suitable for storingextracted data and/or a model of Kerberos activity.

Analysis system 1114 may include instructions, executable by processor1102, that configure detection system 1100 to identify potentiallymalicious activity indicative of an attack by comparing data containedin an obtained authentication message to the extracted data stored inthe repository 1112. In some embodiments, preconfigured or predefineddata from the repository 1112, or another storage source, is used in thecomparison. Analysis system 1114 may be configured, for example, toanalyze the received data associated with the plurality ofauthentication messages; determine, based on the analyzing, a pluralityof characteristics of the data associated with the authenticationmessages; receive data associated with a new authentication message;determine a plurality of characteristics of the data associated with thenew authentication message; compare a determined characteristic of thenew authentication message data with a determined characteristic of theplurality of authentication messages data; and generate, based on thecomparison, an assessment of whether the new authentication message isindicative of the potentially malicious activity, as described above inconnection with any of the preceding methods.

In some embodiments, memory 1104 may further include alerting system1116, as shown. Alerting system 1116 may include instructions,executable by processor 1102, to issue an alert or a warning messagewhen potentially malicious activity is detected by analysis system 1114.

In some embodiments, detection system 1100 may be implemented in wholeor in part using cloud-based, on-demand, or other Internet-enabledcomputing. For instance, the functions of detection system 1100 may, insome embodiments, be provided as cloud-based, on-demand, or otherInternet-enabled services accessible over an Internet connection. Insome embodiments, network interface 1104 may be configured tocommunicate with a network via an Internet connection.

As described above, in some embodiments a ticket used in anauthentication protocol may include both a non-encrypted portion and anencrypted portion. For example, in embodiments where a computer networkoperates according to the Kerberos protocol, a Kerberos ticket, likeKerberos ticket 200 described above in connection with FIG. 2, mayinclude a non-encrypted portion, such as non-encrypted portion 204, andan encrypted portion, such as encrypted portion 206. In anyauthentication protocol, when authentication messages are monitored andcollected, data extracted from the non-encrypted and encrypted portionsmay be used to detect potentially malicious activity in the computernetwork.

FIGS. 12A-12C are flow charts illustrating example methods forperforming detection operations on secure ticket data to detectpotentially malicious activity, in accordance with disclosedembodiments. Methods 1200, 1212, and 1230 may, for example, be performedby authentication system 104, service providing system 106, detectionsystem 108, and/or remediation system 110, as described above inconnection with FIG. 1.

As shown in FIG. 12A, the method 1200 in some embodiments includes step1202 of obtaining encrypted data from an encrypted portion of a secureticket. A secure ticket may be, for example, a ticket used in anauthentication protocol, such as a Kerberos ticket used in the Kerberosprotocol. Other secure tickets are possible as well. The obtainedencrypted data may have been communicated over a network. The encrypteddata may include, for example, data from the encrypted portion of thesecure ticket. Encrypted data may be obtained, for example, fromauthentication messages transmitted, received, and/or stored by, to,and/or among any parties or entities on the network, including anylocation in the network or at a storage location associated with thenetwork.

The method 1200, in some embodiments, also includes, at step 1204,obtaining a decryption key corresponding to the encrypted data. Asreferred to herein, a decryption key may be any information and/or anyalgorithm with which the encrypted data may be decrypted. The decryptionkey may be obtained in a number of manners.

In some embodiments, obtaining the decryption key may involve accessinga network resource to identify, from a plurality of detection keys, asuitable decryption key for decrypting the obtained encrypted data. Anetwork resource may be, for example, another entity, such as a databaseor server, in the network. A network resource may also be, for example,a KDC, Active Directory® data, a credential “vault” that stores originaland/or replacement network credentials, or any other form of networkstorage, either local or remote from a client. A suitable decryption keymay be any decryption key that enables decryption of the encryptedportion. Alternatively or additionally, obtaining the decryption key mayinvolve accessing local storage to identify, from a plurality ofdetection keys, a suitable decryption key for decrypting the obtainedencrypted data. In some embodiments, the decryption key may beidentified based on a metadata portion of the secure ticket. Themetadata portion may be, may include, or may be included in anon-encrypted portion of the secure ticket. In embodiments where thesecure ticket is a Kerberos ticket, such as ticket 200 described abovein connection with FIG. 2, for example, the metadata portion may besimilar to non-encrypted portion 202. Other metadata portions, includingany non-encrypted and/or descriptive portion of any authenticationmessage, are possible as well.

Alternatively or additionally, the decryption key may be identified inother manners selected based on, for instance, available networkresources, based on network configuration, network architecture, and/orsecurity risk. For example, the decryption key may be identified byrequesting the decryption key from an administrative server storingdecryption keys associated with respective TGSs performing encryption(or other servers performing encryption); requesting the decryption keyfrom the TGS identified within the non-encrypted data portion; accessinga local data repository storing decryption keys associated withrespective TGS performing encryption (or other servers performingencryption); or accessing an external database stored on a networkconnected storage device storing decryption keys associated withrespective TGSs performing encryption (or other servers performingencryption). The decryption key may be obtained in other manners aswell.

At step 1206, in some embodiments, the encrypted data may be decryptedusing the obtained decryption key, thereby generating decrypted dataelements. The decrypted data elements, as referred to herein, mayinclude any data elements generated through decryption of the encrypteddata. For example, in some embodiments, the encrypted portion of thesecure ticket may be decrypted using the decryption key. In someembodiments, the decrypted data elements may be stored on a memory(locally and/or remotely).

The method 1200, in some embodiments, may include step 1208 of comparingthe decrypted data elements to at least one of known valid data elementsand known invalid data elements. Known valid data elements, as referredto herein, may be, for example, data elements known to indicate orsuggest legitimate activity on the network, while known invalid dataelements, as referred to herein, may be, for example, data elementsknown to indicate or suggest illegitimate activity on the network, suchas forged tickets. In some embodiments, known valid or invalid dataelements are known to be valid or invalid in a particular network, ormore generally valid or invalid in many or all networks. Other knownvalid and known invalid data elements are possible as well.

The comparing may involve, for example, comparing a flag value from thedecrypted data to a set of known and acceptable flag values. The flagvalue may be, for example, the value of a flag included in the decrypteddata, such as a “FORWARDED” flag, a “PROXY” flag, or a special flag. Theflag value may, in some embodiments, be a binary value. Other flagvalues are possible as well.

Alternatively or additionally, the comparing may involve comparingdomain data from the decrypted data to a set of known and acceptabledomain data. The domain data may be data indicating a domain in whichthe secure ticket was issued. The domain may be a monitored or anunmonitored domain. Acceptable domain data may be data that indicatesthe secure ticket is not indicative of potentially malicious activity.In some embodiments, the acceptable domain data may be data indicating adomain from which the secure ticket should have been issued, asindicated, for example, by related authentication messages. In someembodiments, domain data indicating the secure ticket was issued by anunmonitored domain may be regarded as acceptable domain data in order toavoid false-positive results. Other domain data and acceptable domaindata are possible as well.

Still alternatively or additionally, the comparing may involve comparingclient name data from the decrypted data to a set of known andacceptable client name data. Client name data may be data that indicatesa client to whom the secure ticket was issued. Acceptable client namedata may be data that indicates the secure ticket is not indicative ofpotentially malicious activity. In some embodiments, the acceptableclient name data may be data indicating a client to whom the secureticket should have been issued, as indicated, for example, by relatedauthentication messages. Alternatively or additionally, the comparingmay involve accessing a server to obtain updated data, the updated datacorresponding to data in the decrypted data, and comparing the updateddata with the corresponding data in the decrypted data. Stillalternatively or additionally, the comparing may involve accessing adatabase storing previously received decrypted data from previouslyreceived secure tickets, the previously received decrypted data beingtreated as valid, and comparing the previously received decrypted datawith the decrypted data. Any other ascertaining of similarities and/ordifferences between the decrypted data and other data are possible aswell. The comparing may be performed in other manners as well.

The method 1200, in some embodiments, includes at step 1210 generatingan assessment based on the comparison, the assessment identifyingwhether the secure ticket is indicative of potentially maliciousactivity in the network. The assessment may be generated in any of themanners described above.

In some embodiments, the method 1200 may further include storing, for afuture assessment, the decrypted data elements based on a categoryassociated with the results of the assessment of whether the secureticket is indicative of the potentially malicious activity in thenetwork. Alternatively or additionally, in some embodiments the method1200 may further include identifying an account associated with a senderof the secure ticket, and executing a responsive measure on theidentified account. A responsive measure may include any measure takento mitigate, reverse, and/or prevent the potentially malicious activity.

Turning to FIG. 12B, the method 1212, in some embodiments, includes step1214, as shown, of receiving an encrypted portion of an issued securityaccess ticket. In some embodiments, as shown, associated metadata may bereceived as well. The metadata portion may include, for example, datafrom the non-encrypted portion of the secure access ticket.

The method 1212, in some embodiments, includes at step 1216 obtaining adecryption key. In some embodiments, the decryption key may bedetermined, for example, by identifying an issuing TGS from the receivedmetadata and then communicating with this TGS to obtain the decryptionkey. Identification of the TGS may be direct (e.g., read from aspecified field in the data) and/or indirect (e.g., values in the fieldmay be used to look-up data in a database and/or in another server). Thedecryption key may be obtained in other manners as well.

The method 1212, in some embodiments, includes at step 1218 ofdecrypting the encrypted portion of the security access ticket. Theencrypted portion may be decrypted using the decryption key obtained atstep 1216.

At step 1220, in some embodiments, the decrypted data may be parsed. Theparsing may be performed according to, for example, the authenticationprotocol used by the TGS that issued the security access ticket. Themethod 1212 may be implemented with various authentication protocols,and each authentication protocol may have various versions, such as fordifferent operating systems, and/or according to different updates. Theparsing may be performed according to the implemented protocol and/orversion.

In some embodiments, for example, the decrypted data may be parsedaccording to the fields and/or parameters defined within theimplementation of the authentication protocol, such as the order of thefields and/or parameters, the size of each field and/or parameter,and/or other organization of the fields and/or parameters within thesecurity access ticket. For example, in Microsoft Windows®-basedauthentication, the data may be parsed according to fields that include,for instance, a ticket flag field, encryption key field, domain field,principal name, transited encoding field, time field, host addressfield, authorization data field, and/or at least one field of aprivilege attribute certificate. Other authentication protocols and/orother fields are possible as well.

The parsed decrypted data may be stored on a memory (locally and/orremotely). The parsed decrypted data may be stored, for example, in atable and/or database that stores fields and values of the respectivefield.

The method 1212, in some embodiments, includes at step 1222 analyzingthe parsed decrypted data. The parsed decrypted data may be analyzed,for example, to determine whether the encrypted portion includes validdata or invalid data. The detection of invalid data may be suggest orotherwise indicate that the received security access ticket is aforgery, for example, created by an external third entity (e.g., ahacker or malicious code) other than the TGS identified as beingassociated with the security access ticket.

In some embodiments, the analyzing may be binary (or multiple category)based, for example, generating a result of valid or forged (or othercategories, for example, suspected forgery, suspicious ticket). Thebinary outcome may be generated using a binary analysis method. In someembodiments, for example, when an abnormal value is encountered, theforged result may be generated. Alternatively or additionally, theanalyzing may be probability based, for example, generating aprobability value indicative of a statistical probability that thesecurity access ticket represents a forgery. The probability value may,for instance, be generated using a statistical probability basedanalysis method. In some embodiments, for example, the probability offorgery may rise with certain abnormalities in certain fields, and/ormay rise with increasing number of detected abnormal values.

In some embodiments, for example, a forged result may be identified, forexample, using a binary method that classifies the analysis into thecategory of forged. The forged version may be identified, for example,using a predefined statistical threshold, range, and/or function,applied to the statistical probability generated based on the analysis.For example, when the threshold is 60%, and the probability is 70% offorgery, a forgery result is identified. The threshold and/or range maybe selected, for example, to reduce false positives and/or falsenegative identifications. Other analyzing is possible as well.

At step 1222, in some embodiments, if the analyzing indicates that thedata is invalid, the method 1212 may include step 1224 of identifying aforged security access ticket. The method 1212 may further include step1228 of outputting an indication of the identified forged securityaccess ticket. For example, a network message indicative of theidentified forged version may be generated and outputted as, forinstance, a pop-up message on a graphical user interface forpresentation to an administrator, and/or a message sent to theadministrator (e.g., via email). Other indications, including anynotification of potentially malicious network activity, are possible aswell.

In some embodiments, malicious-related information may be obtained andoutputted and/or stored in association with the indication of the forgedversion of the security access ticket. Example malicious-relatedinformation includes, for instance, identified inconsistencies betweenvalues of the parsed decrypted data and actual updated values (e.g.,stored in the administrative server and/or ticket generating server).Other malicious-related information is possible as well. Themalicious-related information may be used to verify whether theindication is correct.

Alternatively, if the analyzing at step 1222 indicates that the data isvalid, the method 1212 may include step 1226 of identifying a genuinesecurity access ticket. The genuine version may be identified, forexample, when the encrypted portion of the security access ticketincludes valid data in designated fields (e.g., all or certain fields),and/or when the probability that the security access ticket is genuineis above (or below) the predefined threshold. The genuine version may beidentified in other manners as well.

In some embodiments, no action may be taken when the security accessticket is identified as genuine. For example, the remainder of thecomputer network authentication protocol may be allowed to proceedwithout interruption. Alternatively or additionally, in some embodimentsan indication of the identified valid version of the security accessticket may be outputted, for example, as an authentication check of thesecurity access ticket. The TGS may authenticate the security accessticket based on the indication. Still alternatively or additionally,when the packet including the security access ticket has been capturedand/or intercepted, the packet may be allowed to continue transmissionupon identification of the genuine version of the security accessticket. Other actions are possible as well.

FIG. 12C illustrates a method 1230 for detecting a forged version of aKerberos ticket or another type of authentication ticket. The method1230 may permit detection of a forged Kerberos ticket, or anotherticket, external to the KDC.

As shown, the method 1230 includes step 1232 of receiving an encryptedportion of a Kerberos ticket issued by a KDC. In some embodiments,metadata (e.g., a non-encrypted portion of the Kerberos ticket, forexample, as described above in connection with FIG. 2) associated withthe Kerberos ticket may be received as well. The encrypted portion maybe received in several ways.

In some embodiments, for example, packets transmitted to and/or from theKDC over the computer network are monitored and/or intercepted. Inparticular, packets containing Kerberos tickets issued by the KDC may bemonitored and/or intercepted.

Alternatively or additionally, in some embodiments the encrypted portion(and/or the Kerberos ticket, and/or a packet including the Kerberosticket, and/or the metadata) may be received from an external unit thatmaintains records of packets containing Kerberos tickets transmittedover the network, such as a router, a gateway, a network administrativeserver, or other network equipment. The external unit may maintainrecords of packets containing Kerberos tickets issued by the KDC.

In some embodiments, the encrypted portion (or the Kerberos ticket, or apacket including the Kerberos ticket) may be received by accessing alocal agent running on the KDC (e.g., through code implementable by aprocessor of the KDC). The local agent may identify the encryptedportion and/or the metadata of the issuance of the security accessticket. The encrypted portion may be received in other manners as well.

The method 1230, in some embodiments, includes at step 1234 obtaining adecryption key. The decryption key may be obtained, for example, fromthe KDC, an administrative server, and/o a data repository. In someembodiments, the metadata may be used to obtain the decryption key. Thedecryption key may be obtained in other manners as well.

The method 1230, in some embodiments, includes at step 1236 decryptingthe encrypted portion of the Kerberos ticket. The encrypted portion maybe decrypted using, for example, the decryption key obtained in step1234.

At step 1238, in some embodiments, the decrypted data may be parsed. Thedecrypted data may be parsed, for example, in any of the mannersdescribed above in connection with step 1220 of FIG. 12B. Parsing may beperformed based on Kerberos defined fields, for example, as describedbelow.

At step 1240, in some embodiments, the parsed decrypted data may beanalyzed. The parsed decrypted data may be analyzed, for example, in anyof the manners described above in connection with step 1222 of FIG. 12B.

Based on the analyzing at step 1240, in some embodiments, the Kerberosticket may be identified as forged or as genuine. If the Kerberos ticketis identified as forged, the method 1230 may include step 1242 ofidentifying the forged Kerberos ticket. In some embodiments, theanalysis may detect new types of attacks based on forgeries of Kerberostickets, and/or attacks such as Golden Ticket, and other known or yet-tobe known attacks (e.g., Zero Days attacks).

In some embodiments, the method 1230 may include step 1246 withoutputting an indication of the identification of the forged Kerberosticket. The indication of the identified forged Kerberos ticket may beoutputted (e.g., transmitted or provided) to, for example, a securityserver or security process, for use by the server or process. Theindication may be output, for example, in any of the manners describedabove in connection with step 1228 of FIG. 12B.

Alternatively, in embodiments where the analyzing at step 1240 indicatesthat the Kerberos ticket is genuine, the method 1230 may include step1244 of identifying the Kerberos ticket as genuine.

FIG. 13 is a block diagram illustrating an example system 1300 forperforming potentially malicious activity detection operations on secureticket data, in accordance with disclosed embodiments. System 1300 maybe used to perform, for example, any of methods 1200, 1212, and 1230.

As shown, system 1300 includes a detection system 1302 having aprocessing unit 1304, program store 1322, and data repository 1324. Insome embodiments, detection system 1302 may be similar to, for example,detection system 108 described above in connection with FIG. 1 and/ordetection system 1100 described above in connection with FIG. 11. Inother embodiments, system 1300 may be implemented by authenticationsystem 104, service providing system 106, detection system 108, and/orremediation system 110, as described above in connection with FIG. 1.

Processing unit 1304 may include one or more processors (homogenous orheterogeneous), which may be arranged for parallel processing, asclusters, and/or as one or more multi-core processing units. In someembodiments, processing unit 1304 may, for example, be similar toprocessor 1102 described above in connection with FIG. 11.

In some embodiments, program store 1322 may be similar to memory 1106and/or one or more of receiving system 1108, model generating system1110, analysis system 1114, and alerting system 1116 described above inconnection with FIG. 11. Alternatively or additionally, in someembodiments data repository 1324 may be similar to repository 1112described above in connection with FIG. 11. Program store 1322 and/orrepository 1324 may include instructions, executable by processing unit1324, to carry out one or more processes for detecting potentiallymalicious activity. In some embodiments, program store 1322 may beconfigured for storing code and implementable, for example, as a randomaccess memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), non-volatile memory,magnetic media, semiconductor memory devices, hard drive, removablestorage, and optical media (e.g., DVD, CD-ROM). Alternatively oradditionally, in some embodiments repository 1324 may be configured forstoring database(s), and/or other data items, for example, historicaldata of valid and/or forged security access tickets, and/or astatistical classifier trained for classification of security accesstickets into forged or valid categories, as described herein.

In some embodiments, detection system 1302 may include multiplecomputers (having heterogeneous or homogenous architectures), which maybe arranged for distributed processing, such as in clusters.

Detection system 1302 may include a network interface 1308 adapted forcommunication with network resources operating over a network 1306, asshown. In some embodiments, network interface 1308 may be similar to,for example, network interface 1104 described above in connection withFIG. 11.

In some embodiments, detection system 1302 may further include a userinterface 1326 adapted for access to and/or receipt of user data. Userinterface 1326 may be, for example, a graphical user interface, a webserver (allowing remote access and/or remote interface capabilities), adisplay, a screen, a mouse, a keyboard, and/or a touch screen. Otheruser interfaces are possible as well.

In some embodiments, detection system 1302 may include or may be incommunication with a network monitoring device 1310, via networkinterface 1308, that monitors network traffic, such as network messages(e.g., packets), transmitted over the network 1306. In some embodiments,network monitoring device 1310 may perform real-time monitoring ofpackets within network 1306. Network monitoring device 1310 may be ormay include, for example, a packet sniffer, a packet analyzer, a networksensor, and/or network gateway. Other network monitoring devices arepossible as well.

Network 1306 may be a secured or an unsecured network (e.g., network 112from FIG. 1), such as the Internet, a private network (secured orunsecured), a cellular network, a wireless network, a local areanetwork, or another network. Network 1306 may be configured to provide aplatform for communication between different networked resources andaccounts in, for example, a Kerberos-based system environment. Otherauthentication protocols are possible as well.

In some embodiments, units that communicate with network 1306 mayinclude, for example, an authentication system 1312. Authenticationsystem 1312 may be configured to, for example, issue security accesstickets according to an implementation of a computer networkauthentication protocol. In some embodiments, authentication system 1312may be similar to, for example, authentication system 104 describedabove in connection with FIG. 1. To this end, authentication system 1312may facilitate communication, for example, between a client (or othernetwork node) 1314 and a service providing system 1316 over network1306. In some embodiments, client 1314 and/or service providing system1316 may be similar to, for example, client 102 and service providingsystem 106, respectively, described above in connection with FIG. 1.Alternatively or additionally, client 1314 and/or service providingsystem 1316 may take the form of a network node, a web server, a datastorage device, a mobile device, a smartphone, a tablet computer, adesktop computer, a notebook computer, a wearable computer, a watchcomputer, a glasses computer, and/or a computer at a kiosk, etc. Otherclients and service providing servers are possible as well.

Authentication system 1312 may include and/or may be in communicationwith one or more sub-components and/or sub-servers that may, forexample, depend on the implementation of the computer networkauthentication protocol. In some embodiments, for example, whenauthentication system 1312 implements the Kerberos protocol,authentication system 1312 may include or be in communication with aKDC, an AS, or a TGS. Other examples are possible as well.

Detection system 1302 may be programmed and/or positioned to monitorand/or intercept network traffic transmitted over network 1306, vianetwork interface 1308. In some embodiments, for example, detectionsystem 1302 may be programmed and/or positioned within network 1306 withnetwork interface 1308 adapted to monitor and/or intercept encrypteddata related to an encrypted portion of a security access ticket that istransmitted over network 1306, as described above.

In some embodiments, for example, network interface 1308 may be adaptedto monitor network traffic to and/or from authentication system 1312(and/or from one or more sub-components and/or sub-servers ofauthentication system 1312). Detection system 1302 may be programmedand/or positioned to monitor and/or intercept security access ticketstransmitted to the authentication system 1312, and/or transmitted fromthe authentication system 1312. Detection system 1302 may be programmedand/or positioned in other ways, as well, such as to monitor and/orintercept security access tickets transmitted to and/or from client 1314and/or security access tickets transmitted to and/or from serviceproviding system 1316. Detection system 1302 may monitor and/orintercept different tickets at different stages of the implementation ofthe computer network authentication protocol as well.

In some embodiments, the monitored and/or intercepted tickets mayinclude, for example: a session ticket (or a client-to-server ticket),such as that used by client 1314 requesting services from the serviceproviding system 1316; or a ticket granting ticket, such as that used byclient 1314 requesting the session ticket from authentication system1312. Other ticket types may be monitored and/or intercepted as well,and interception and/or monitoring of tickets may occur at differentstages of the computer network authentication protocol.

In some embodiments, an administrative server 1318 may be incommunication with network 1306. Administrative server 1318 may storeaccess data, such as decryption keys associated with different userlogins, different client accounts, and/or with different authenticationsystems 1312 performing encryption. In some embodiments, administrativeserver 1318 may be accessed by detection system 1302 to, for example,obtain data used in decryption of the encrypted portion of the securityaccess ticket, in parsing the decrypted data, and/or in analyzing theparsed decrypted data, as described herein. In some embodiments,administrative server 1318 may maintain and store an active directory(e.g., Active Directory®).

In some embodiments, a security server 1320 may be in communication withnetwork 1306. Security server 1320 may store network securityapplications, which may be triggered and/or directed based on theoutcome of the analysis of the security access ticket by detectionsystem 1302. For example, in some embodiments security server 1320 mayexecute a network security program to isolate a client when a forgedsecurity access ticket transmitted by the client is detected.

While only one of each of detection system 1302, authentication system1312, client 1314, service providing system 1316, and/or othercomponents of system 1300 is shown for clarity, in some embodiments,network 1306 may include more than one of any of detection system 1302,authentication system 1312, client 1314, service providing system 1316,and/or other components of system 1300.

In some embodiments, one or more components of system 1300 may beimplemented in whole or in part using cloud-based, on-demand, or otherInternet-enabled computing. For instance, the functions of detectionsystem 1302, network monitoring device 1310, network 1306, securityserver 1320, authentication system(s) 1312, administrative server(s)1318, client(s) 1314, and/or service providing system(s) 1316 may, insome embodiments, be provided as cloud-based, on-demand, or otherInternet-enabled services accessible over an Internet connection. Insome embodiments, communicative coupling among detection system 1302,network monitoring device 1310, network 1306, security server 1320,authentication system(s) 1312, administrative server(s) 1318, client(s)1314, and/or service providing system(s) 1316 may be via an Internetconnection.

In some embodiments, program store 1322 may contain instructions that,when executed by processing unit 1304, cause detection system 1302 toperform one or more of methods 1200, 1212, and 1230 described above inconnection with FIGS. 12A-12C. More generally, detection system 1302 maybe configured to detect a forged version of a security access ticketbased on a computer network authentication protocol for granting access,optionally between a client and a service providing server communicatingover a network, which may be unsecure. In some embodiments, suchdetection may be implemented based on a system architecture in which thedetection system 1302 is located externally to the authentication system1312 (which, e.g., issues a genuine version of the security accessticket), as shown.

Detection system 1302 may be configured to receive an encrypted portionof an issued security access ticket. Optionally, metadata (e.g.,non-encrypted portion of the security access ticket) associated with thesecurity access ticket is received by detection system 1302 as well. Themetadata may be used for obtaining the decryption key to decrypt thereceived encrypted portion, as described below.

The encrypted portion may be extracted from the security access ticket,for example, by detection system 1302, by network monitoring device1310, and/or by another device in communication with detection system1302. The security access ticket may be extracted from a packetintercepted and/or monitored within network 1306, for example, bydetection system 1302, by network monitoring device 1310, and/or anotherdevice in communication with detection system 1302.

The encrypted portion may be received by detection system 1302 bycommunicating with network monitoring device 1310 and/or networkinterface 1308, each of which may monitor network packets (optionally inreal-time) transmitted within network 1306. In some embodiments, packetscontaining security access tickets that are issued by authenticationsystem 1312 and/or security server 1320 (or another server) may bemonitored and/or intercepted. In some embodiments, network monitoringdevice 1310 is programmed to monitor packets being transmitted to and/orfrom authentication system 1312 (or to and/or from client 1314, or toand/or from service providing system 1316).

In some embodiments, network interface 1308 and/or network monitoringdevice 1310 may monitor real time network traffic relating to ticketsbeing communicated over network 1306 and/or extract encrypted dataassociated with the encrypted part of the security access ticket.Monitoring may be performed continuously, optionally on all networktraffic to detect packets containing security access tickets.

Network monitoring device 1310 may be configured to transmit identifiedpackets containing security access tickets and/or the encrypted portionof the security access ticket to detection system 1302 via networkinterface 1308. Further, network monitoring device 1310 may beconfigured to monitor the transmitted packets. For example, in someembodiments, monitored packets may be intercepted, and/or logged bynetwork monitoring device 1310.

Packets may be analyzed to detect the presence of security access ticketstored within the packet, for example, within the payload portion. Thesecurity access ticket may be extracted from such packets. The encryptedportion (and/or the security access ticket, and/or a packet includingthe security access ticket, and/or the metadata) may be received bydetection system 1302 from an external unit that maintains records ofpackets containing security access tickets transmitted over network1306, such as a router, a gateway, a network administrative server, andother network equipment. The external unit may maintain records ofpackets containing security access tickets issued by authenticationsystem 1312 or other servers.

In some embodiments, the encrypted portion (or the security accessticket, or a packet including the security access ticket) may bereceived by detection system 1302 by accessing a local agent running onauthentication system 1312, such as code implementable by a processor ofauthentication system 1312, and/or by accessing a local agent running ondetection system 1302. The local agent may identify the encryptedportion and/or the metadata of the issuance of the security accessticket.

The security access ticket may include an encrypted portion and anon-encrypted portion, such as metadata. The non-encrypted portion mayinclude an identifier indicative of the authentication system 1312 thatissued and/or encrypted the security access ticket, such as the networkaddress of the authentication system 1312, and/or an identification ofthe instance of the authentication system 1312 (e.g., the ServicePrincipal Name and/or the Security Peripheral, which is an identifierfor a certain service offered by a certain hosting server within anauthentication domain. In some embodiments, such as those in whichsystem 1300 operates according to the Kerberos protocol, the identifierof the authentication system 1312 (which may be or may include, forexample, a KDC) that issued the ticket may be located in the encryptedportion. The domain name of the authentication system 1312 or KDC may beidentified based on the metadata of the non-encrypted portion. In someembodiments, there may be multiple authentication systems 1312 in thenetwork and/or in the network domain, located on different serversand/or on the same server with different instance identifies.

The non-encrypted portion of the secure access ticket may include theencryption scheme used for encrypting the data. Alternatively oradditionally, the encryption scheme may be obtained, for example, by thedetection system 1302 querying the authentication system 1312, theadministrative server 1318, a local database, and/or other servers.

Encryption of the encrypted portion of the security access ticket may beperformed by the authentication system 1312, a sub-component of theauthentication system 1312, and/or another entity (e.g., an applicationon the same server and/or a different server).

Processing unit 1304 may be configured to parse and analyze thedecrypted data as described above in connection with FIGS. 12B and 12C.To this end, processing unit 1304 may be configured to executeinstructions to cause detection system 1302 to perform the analyzing.The analyzing may be performed in various manners, which may be executedsimultaneously and/or sequentially.

In some embodiments, for example, the analyzing may involve comparing avalue of a flag of the parsed decrypted data (e.g., stored in datarepository 1324) to valid value options defined by the implementation ofthe computer network authentication protocol installed on authenticationsystem 1312 that supposedly issued the security access ticket. Forexample, an abnormal ticket flag compared to defined options of thecomputer network authentication protocol may be indicative of a forgery.

Alternatively or additionally, in some embodiments the analyzing mayinvolve comparing a case sensitive domain of the parsed decrypted data(e.g., stored in data repository 1324) to valid case sensitivity ofdomains as defined by the implementation of the computer networkauthentication protocol installed on authentication system 1312 thatsupposedly issued the security access ticket.

Alternatively or additionally, in some embodiments the analyzing mayinvolve comparing a case sensitive client name of the parsed decrypteddata (e.g., stored in data repository 1324) to valid case sensitivity ofclient names as defined by the implementation of the computer networkauthentication protocol installed on authentication system 1312 thatsupposedly issued the security access ticket.

Alternatively or additionally, in some embodiments the analyzing mayinvolve comparing a lifetime value of the security access ticket (e.g.,stored in data repository 1324) to valid ticket lifetimes as defined bythe implementation of the computer network authentication protocolinstalled on authentication system 1312 that supposedly issued thesecurity access ticket. For example, the values of authentication time(e.g., authtime field) and/or renew-until (e.g., renew-till field) maybe verified to determine whether they are in the future or past. Forexample, the value of the renew-until field minus the value of theauthentication time field may be according to the value defined forticket renewal by the implementation of the protocol. As anotherexample, the value of the start time field and/or end time field may bein the past or future. As another example, the value of the start timefield minus the value of the end time field may be according to thevalue defined for ticket lifetime by the implementation of the protocol.Other examples are possible as well.

In some embodiments, the analyzing may be performed by Processing Unit1304 of detection system 1302 by applying a set-of-rules to the parseddecrypted data to detect cases of potentially malicious activity in thedata. The set-of-rules may, for example, compare actual decrypted datato the definition of the data according to the implementation of thecomputer network authentication protocol. The set-of-rules may bestored, for example, locally in data repository 1324, and/or remotely ona storage device and/or server. The set-of-rules may define cases inwhich anomalous data may occur. For example, according to theimplementation of the computer network authentication protocol, certainfields in the encrypted portion of the security access ticket (i.e.,decrypted data) may be defined as required to specify data. When suchfields are identified as containing no data, then an anomaly suggestinga forgery may be identified. In another example, when inconsistenciesare identified between group membership of an account field of thedecrypted data and the group membership element in administrative server1318, an anomaly may be identified.

Alternatively or additionally, administrative server 1318 may beaccessed by detection system 1302 to obtain actual updated values offields stored in the encrypted portion of the security access ticket.The analysis may be performed by comparing the actual updated valuesobtained from the administrative server with corresponding values of theparsed decrypted data to identify inconsistencies. The comparison may beperformed, for example, using a correlation function, and/or othercomparison methods. The actual updated values may include, for example,user information of an account of the client attempting to use thesecurity access ticket to access a service of the service providingserver. The user information may include, for example, logon credentialsand/or group membership of the account. Other user information ispossible as well.

Alternatively or additionally, the analyzing may be based on comparingcategorized parsed decrypted data of previously identified genuineversions and/or forged versions of security access tickets tocorresponding values of the parsed decrypted data to identifyinconsistencies and/or to identify matches. The analysis may beperformed, for example, by a statistical classifier that has beentrained using the categorized historical decrypted data (or othermachine learning based methods, or a set-of-rules, or other historicaldata analysis methods) and/or security access tickets into thecategories of, for example, forgery or valid. The statistical classifiermay be stored locally and/or remotely, for example, within datarepository 1324.

When an inconsistency is found using the statistical classifier,administrative server 1318 may be accessed to obtain actual updatedallowable values defined for the fields of the decrypted data. Theactual updated values may be compared with corresponding values of theparsed decrypted data identified as inconsistencies using thestatistical classifier (or other methods). In this manner, errors inidentification of anomalous data may be reduced or prevented byconsidering updates to the implemented protocol. In some embodiments,since updates may be infrequent, administrative server 1318 may beaccessed when anomalous data is detected based on historical data,rather than accessing administrative server 1318 more frequently (i.e.,instead of using the historical data). Such a method may improveutilization of processing, storage, and/or network services, by reducingthe frequency of access requests to the administrative server 1318.

Example fields, values, data, and/or data elements (e.g., according tothe Kerberos protocol and/or other computer network authenticationprotocols) included within the encrypted part of the security accessticket that may be analyzed by detection system 1302 for identificationof the forged security access ticket (i.e., analyzed in the decryptedoptionally parsed state) include one or more of:

Ticket Flag field: indicates which options were used or requested whenthe ticket was issued.

Encryption Key Field.

Realm (or domain) field: specifies the realm (or domain) name related toissuance of the ticket. For example, the name of the realm (or domain)in which the client is registered, and/or the name of the realm in whichinitial authentication occurred.

Principal Name: containing the name part of the client's principalidentifier.

Transited Encoding field: includes names of the Kerberos realms (ordomains) that took part in authenticating the user to whom the ticketwas issued.

Kerberos Time field: specifies, for example, one or more of: the starttime after which the ticket is valid, end time containing the expirationtime after which the ticket will no longer be honored (and, for example,rejected or invalidated), authentication time, renewal time indicatingthe maximum end time that may be included in a renewal of a ticket.

Host Address Field.

Authorization-Data field: used to pass authorization data from theprincipal on whose behalf a ticket was issued to the applicationservice. If no authorization data is included, the Authorization-datafield is omitted. The Authorization-data field includes restrictions onauthority obtained on the basis of authentication using the securityaccess ticket. The Authorization-data field may include data thatspecifies what actions may be performed with the ticket, according tothe Kerberos implementation in the network. The data in theAuthorization-data field may be valid for a certain purpose (such as forobtaining account(s) logon-related information), and may specify thedesignated end-service, names of service-specific objects, and rights tothose objects. For example, a client wishing to print a file may obtaina file server proxy to be passed to the print server.

In some embodiments, the parsed decrypted data may be stored in anhistorical database. The parsed decrypted data may, for example, bestored according to a certain category based on the analysis and/oridentified version of the security access ticket, such as forgery,invalid, or genuine. The data from the analysis of the differentsecurity access tickets by one or multiple detection systems 1302 may beaggregated within the historical database. The parsed decrypted data andthe certain category may be used to update the statistical classifier(or other machine learning and/or categorization method). In thismanner, the detection system 1302 includes the learning process, forexample, to learn to identify new types of attacks using security accesstickets. The historical database may be stored in a central location,for access by multiple detection systems 1302, allowing the differentservers to detect new types of attacks based on identification of forgedsecurity access tickets by other detection systems 1302.

The indication and/or other information that is output by detectionsystem 1302 may be used by any other system (eitherinternally-implemented and/or an external system) operating over network1306, in order to, for example, take an appropriate action to securenetwork 1306 from a malicious attack.

For example, the indication of the identified forged version of thesecurity access ticket may be output (e.g. transmitted, provided, etc.)to a security program and/or a remediation program, which may be storedlocally and/or remotely, for example, on security server 1320. Suchinformation may be used by the receiving program, for example, fordeleting the forged ticket, preventing the authentication system 1312from authenticating the security access ticket (or otherwise halting theprotocol), isolating the client associated with the ticket, and/orexecuting other network security processes.

FIG. 14 is a table 1400 of example decryption schemes, in accordancewith disclosed embodiments. The decryption schemes may, for example, besuitable for software and/or hardware implementations, according to theKerberos computer network authentication protocol encryption types, inaccordance with some. Other encryption and/or decryption schemes,including those not associated with the Kerberos protocol, are possibleas well.

As shown, example decryption schemes may include, for example, DataEncryption Standard (DES) decryption schemes, such as “des-cbc-crc,”“des-cbc-md4,” “des-cbc-md5,” and “des3-cbc-sha1” decryption schemes.Example decryption schemes may further include, for example, Arcfour(also known as RC4) decryption schemes, such as “arcfour-hmac” and“arcfour-hmac-exp” decryption schemes. Example decryption schemes maystill further include, for example, Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)decryption schemes, such as “aes128-cts-hmac-shat-96” and“aes256-cts-hmac-sha1-96.” Example decryption schemes may furtherinclude, for example, Camellia decryption schemes, such as“camellia128-cts-cmac” and “camellia256-cts-cmac.” Other decryptionschemes are possible as well.

FIG. 15 is a block diagram illustrating an example system 1500 forperforming detection operations on a Kerberos protocol ticket to detectpotentially malicious activity, in accordance with disclosedembodiments. As shown, system 1500 may include detection system 1502,including processing unit 1504, program store 1522, and data repository1524. Detection system 1502, processing unit 1504, program store 1522,and data repository 1524 may take any of the forms described above fordetection systems 108, 1100, and 1302 (in FIGS. 1, 11, and 13),processing unit 1304, program store 1322, and data repository 1324,respectively.

In some embodiments, detection system 1502 may further include userinterface 1526 and network interface 1508. User interface 1526 andnetwork interface 1508 may take any of the forms described above foruser interface 1326 and network interface 1308, respectively.

As shown, system 1500 further includes network monitoring device 1510,network 1506, administrative server 1518, service providing system 1516,and client 1514. Network monitoring device 1510, network 1506,administrative server 1518, service providing system 1516, and client1514 may take any of the forms described above for network monitoringdevice 1310, network 1306, administrative server 1318, service providingsystem 1316, and client 1314, respectively.

As shown, system 1500 further includes KDC 1512, which may include anAuthentication Service (AS) component 1512A and/or a Ticket GrantingServer (TGS) component 1512B. AS 1512A and TGS 1512B may be implementedwithin a single server or within different servers.

In some embodiments, one or more components of system 1500 may beimplemented in whole or in part using cloud-based, on-demand, or otherInternet-enabled computing. For instance, the functions of detectionsystem 1502, network monitoring device 1510, network 1506, KDC 1512,administrative server(s) 1518, client(s) 1514, and/or service providingsystem(s) 1516 may, in some embodiments, be provided as cloud-based,on-demand, or other Internet-enabled services accessible over anInternet connection. In some embodiments, communicative coupling amongdetection system 1502, network monitoring device 1510, network 1506, KDC1512, administrative server(s) 1518, client(s) 1514, and/or serviceproviding system(s) 1516 may be via an Internet connection.

In some embodiments, monitored and/or intercepted packets may betransmitted over network 1506 to and/or from AS 1512A and/or TGS 1512B.A Kerberos ticket may be extracted from a monitored and/or interceptedpacket. The Kerberos ticket may be, for example, a ticket grantingticket (TGT) issued by AS 1512A, which may be intercepted, for example,during transmission from AS 1512A to client 1514; or a client-to-serverticket issued by TGS 15126, which may be intercepted, for example,during transmission from TGS 1512B to client 1514, and/or duringtransmission from Client 1514 to Service Providing Server 1516. Otherpackets, including any packet transmitted, received, and/or stored inconnection with an authentication protocol, are possible as well.

Example use cases are now described, based on the methods and systemsdescribed above. It will be understood that the example cases are merelyillustrative and are not meant to be limiting.

In an example case, an attacker may attempt a Golden Ticket attack usingarbitrary data in a Kerberos computer network authentication protocolenvironment. The created forged security access ticket may allow theattacker to impersonate another account in the network. Using thesystems and/or methods described herein (e.g., the detection system),when the attacker attempts to authenticate to the service providingserver using the forged ticket, the detection system may detect theforgery. The forgery may be detected based on identified inconsistenciesbetween the parsed data element containing Logon information of theclient account (in the encrypted portion of the security access ticket)and existing Logon information currently logged for the client accountin an administrative server (e.g., Active Directory®).

In another example case, an attacker may attempt a Silver Ticket Attackby creating a Kerberos based Ticket Granting Server (TGS) (or a similarserver based on a different protocol) with additional group memberships,to attempt to obtain elevated privileges. When the attacker attemptsauthentication by a target service server, the detection system maydetect the forged security access ticket. The forgery may be detectedbased on identified inconsistencies between the group memberships of theaccount field (defined in the encrypted portion of the security accessticket) and the group memberships actually defined for the clientaccount in the administrative server (e.g., Active Directory®).

In some embodiments, the systems and/or methods described herein may beimplemented within a Windows® based system environment that implementsKerberos as the computer network authentication protocol. In such animplementation, the Authorization-Data field in the encrypted portion ofthe security access ticket may include, for example, a PAC datastructure. The PAC data structure (e.g., sub-portions 210, 212, and/or214 described above in connection with FIG. 2) includes a linked list toPAC related data. Example data elements and/or data attributes includedwithin the PAC data structure that may be used in the analysis todetermine whether the security access ticket is a forgery may, forexample, include one or more of:

Logon Time: A FILETIME structure that includes the user account's lastlogon attribute value.

LogoffTime: A FILETIME structure that includes the time the client'slogon session will expire.

KickOffTime: A FILETIME structure that includes Log off Time minus theuser account's force Logoff time.

PasswordLastSet: A FILETIME structure that includes the user account'spwdLastSet attribute.

PasswordCanChange: A FILETIME structure that includes the time at whichthe client's password is allowed to change.

PasswordMustChange: A FILETIME structure that includes the time at whichthe client's password expires.

EffectiveName: An RPC_UNICODE_STRING structure that includes the useraccount's attribute value.

FullName: An RPC_UNICODE_STRING structure that includes the useraccount's full name for interactive logon and is defined to be zero fornetwork logon.

LogonScript: An RPC_UNICODE_STRING structure that includes the useraccount's scriptPath attribute value for interactive logon and isdefined to be zero for network logon.

ProfilePath: An RPC_UNICODE_STRING structure that includes the useraccount's profilePath attribute value for interactive logon and isdefined to be zero for network logon.

HomeDirectory: An RPC_UNICODE_STRING structure that includes the useraccount's HomeDirectory attribute value for interactive logon and isdefined to be zero for network logon.

HomeDirectoryDrive: An RPC_UNICODE_STRING structure that includes theuser account's HomeDrive attribute value for interactive logon and isdefined to be zero for network logon. This member is defined as beingpopulated when HomeDirectory includes a universal naming convention(UNC) path structure containing information that defines how to read apath.

LogonCount: A 16-bit unsigned integer that includes the user account'sLogonCount attribute value.

BadPasswordCount: A 16-bit unsigned integer that includes the useraccount's badPwdCount attribute value for interactive logon.

UserId: A 32-bit unsigned integer that includes the RID of the account.

PrimaryGroupId: A 32-bit unsigned integer that includes the RID for theprimary group to which this account belongs.

GroupCount: A 32-bit unsigned integer that includes the number of groupswithin the account domain to which the account belongs.

GroupIds: A pointer to a list of GROUP MEMBERSHIP structures thatinclude the groups to which the account belongs in the account domain.

UserFlags: A 32-bit unsigned integer that includes a set of bit flagsthat describe the user's logon information.

UserSessionKey: A session key that is used for cryptographic operationson a session.

LogonServer. An RPC_UNICODE_STRING structure that includes the NetBIOSname of the Kerberos KDC that performed the authentication server (AS)ticket request.

LogonDomainName: An RPC_UNICODE_STRING structure that includes theNetBIOS name of the domain to which this account belongs.

LogonDomainId: An RPC_SID structure that includes the SID for the domainspecified in LogonDomainName. This member is used in conjunction withthe UserId, PrimaryGroupId, and GroupIds members to create the user andgroup SIDs for the client.

Reserved1: A two-element array of unsigned 32-bit integers. This memberis reserved, and each element of the array is defined to be zero whentransmitted.

UserAccountControl: A 32-bit unsigned integer that includes a set of bitflags that represent information about this account. This field carriesthe UserAccountControl information from the corresponding SecurityAccount Manager field.

SubAuthStatus: A 32-bit unsigned integer that includes thesubauthentication package's section status code.

LastSuccessfullLogon: A FILETIME structure that includes the useraccount's Last Successful Interactive Logon Time.

LastFailedlLogon: A FILETIME structure that includes the user account'sLast Failed Interactive Logon Time.

FailedlLogonCount: A 32-bit unsigned integer that includes the useraccount's Failed Interactive Logon Count At Last Successful Logon.

Reserved3: A 32-bit integer. This member is reserved, and is defined tobe zero when transmitted.

SidCount: A 32-bit unsigned integer that includes the total number ofSIDs present in the ExtraSids member.

ExtraSids: A pointer to a list of KERB_SID_AND_ATTRIBUTES structuresthat contain a list of SIDs corresponding to groups in domains otherthan the account domain to which the principal belongs.

ResourceGroupDomainSid: An RPC_SID structure that includes the SID ofthe domain for the server whose resources the client is authenticatingto.

ResourceGroupCount: A 32-bit unsigned integer that includes the numberof resource group identifiers stored in ResourceGroupIds.

ResourceGroupIds: A pointer to a list of GROUP MEMBERSHIP structuresthat contain the RIDs and attributes of the account's groups in theresource domain.

Other data elements and/or data attributes are possible as well.

Once potentially malicious activity is detected in a computer network,it may be desirable to remediate the network. Remediation may, in someembodiments, involve taking corrective action to prevent, mitigate,and/or reverse the potentially malicious activity.

FIG. 16 is a block diagram of an example computer network system 1600including a remediation system 1602, in accordance with disclosedembodiments. Remediation system 1602 may be configured to prevent,mitigate, and/or reverse the potentially malicious activity detected ina computer network by one or more detection systems, such as any ofdetection system 108 described above in connection with FIG. 1,detection system 1100 described above in connection with FIG. 11,detection system 1302 described above in connection with FIG. 13, anddetection system 1502 described above in connection with FIG. 15. Insome embodiments, remediation system 1602 may be configured to performand/or cause to be performed one or more control actions in connectionwith one or more network accounts. Control actions may be actions takento prevent, mitigate, and/or reverse the potentially malicious activity.

As shown, remediation system 1602 may operate within a computer networkenvironment. The network entities communicate over computer network1610. As shown, for example, computer network 1610 facilitatescommunication between remediation system 1602, a credentialing system1604, service providing systems 1606, and source machines 1608, whichmay include one or more user accounts 1618.

In some embodiments, one or more of components of system 1600 may beimplemented in whole or in part using cloud-based, on-demand, or otherInternet-enabled computing. For instance, the functions of remediationsystem 1602, credentialing system 1604, service providing system(s)1606, source machine(s) 1608, computer network 1610, and/or externalentity 1610 may, in some embodiments, be provided as cloud-based,on-demand, or other Internet-enabled services accessible over anInternet connection. In some embodiments, communicative coupling amongremediation system 1602, credentialing system 1604, service providingsystem(s) 1606, source machine(s) 1608, computer network 1610, and/orexternal entity 1610 may be via an Internet connection.

Computer network 1610 may be any type and/or scale of network, using anytype of protocol, whether known or yet to be known in the art. Examplesof computer networks may include, for example, the Internet or anotherwide area network, a local area network (LAN), organizational network,global area network, or virtual network.

The term network entity encompasses any hardware or software componentcapable of communicating over the computer network. At least some ofthese network entities may have associated accounts, such as useraccounts or service accounts. For example, source machine(s) 1910 isshown to have associated user account(s) 1618.

Remediation system 1602 may include communication interface 1612 andprocessing unit 1614. In some embodiments, remediation system 1602 mayfurther include a control action software module and/or other logic (notshown).

Communication interface 1612 may be, for example, a physical or logicalport connection provided to communicate with computer entitiescommunicating and operating over computer network 1610 or that areexternal to computer network 1610, including endpoint machines, servers,target services and the like. In some embodiments, for instance,communication interface 1612 may be a network port connection forreceiving notifications, otherwise referred to herein as indications, ofdetected potentially malicious activity in computer network 1610.

Such notifications or indications may be in the form of any signal ormessage that is issued out to remediation system 1602 in order to notifyremediation system 1602 that potentially malicious activity is beingdetected in computer network 1610. In some embodiments, the notificationmay be issued by a different system or entity in computer network 1610that interacts with remediation system 1602 or by an external systemthat communicates with computer network 1610. In some embodiments, thenotification may be provided by an external entity which independentlymonitors activity in computer network 1610. Alternatively oradditionally, notifications may be obtained by polling network entitieswhich are of interest (such as target services, computer servers,computer endpoints, credentialing system, etc.) and requestingnotification of detected suspicious activity and/or other information ofinterest. Other notifications are possible as well.

Potentially malicious activity may be detected in any number of ways,including, for example, the methods described above in connection withFIGS. 3, 4, 5A, 6A, 7A, 8A, 9A, 10A, and 12A-C. Other methods ofdetecting potentially malicious activity are possible as well.

As shown, communication interface 1612 may be operatively connected toprocessing unit 1614. In some embodiments, processing unit 1614 may beconfigurable with implementation logic to perform the processing andcommunication operations required to implement embodiments of theinvention as described herein. In some embodiments, for example, when anotification of potentially malicious activity in computer network 1610is received through communication interface 1612, processing unit 1614may be operative to carry out various actions.

In some embodiments, for example, processing unit 1614 may be configuredto analyze data specified in the received notification for identifyingat least one account associated with the potentially malicious activity(also denoted herein an associated account). In some embodiments,processing unit 1614 may be further operative to analyze additionalinformation relating to the potentially malicious activity. Suchadditional information may, for example, be obtained from other networkentities, such as data logs, credential repository information, and thelike. An associated account may, for example, be an account that isassociated with the detected potentially malicious activity eitherdirectly or indirectly. In some embodiments, the association may beaffected by many parameters, including, but not limited to, network andcommunication protocols, the type of account and the type of suspiciousactivity or attack.

In some embodiments, processing unit 1614 may be further configured todetermine one or more respective control actions to perform for at leastone of the identified accounts in reaction to the potentially maliciousactivity. In some embodiments, the control actions may be determinedseparately for each account, for a sub-group of accounts (e.g., for aspecified type of account), or for all of the identified accounts as agroup. Examples of control actions are presented below.

In some embodiments, processing unit 1614 may be still furtherconfigured to cause respective control actions to be performed on theidentified accounts (either directly, or indirectly such as by invokinga different network element to perform the control action). A controlaction performed on an account may include one or multiple actions, suchas terminating a session, changing service account credentials, limitinguser authorization, and/or changing user account credentials. Useraccount credentials may include information used by a user to access anaccount, such as a user identification, logon, or password. Othercredentials, including any information usable to gain access to and/orotherwise associated with a network account, are possible as well.

In some embodiments, credentials used for accessing accounts andmanaging communication sessions may be managed by credentialing system1604. In some embodiments, credentialing system 1604 may take the formof, for example, a Privileged Account Management System (PAMS). Othercredentialing systems are possible as well.

A PAMS is a system that manages privileged accounts, access, and actionsin accordance with an organizational policy by controlling and managingthe credentials to privileged accounts (i.e., privileged credentials). Aprivileged account may be, for example, an account having heightenedaccess to the network, such as an administrator account. Otherprivileged accounts are possible as well. In some embodiments, the PAMSmay include user authentication, mapping of which users are allowedusage of which privileged account(s), and logging of privilegedaccount(s) usage. In some embodiments, the PAMS may include additionalfeatures such as monitoring of actions performed by privileged users.Other additional features may include, for example, support of variousworkflows, such as managerial approval for password retrieval,correlation with ticketing systems, one-time passwords, and passwordreplacement. Other additional features are possible as well. Thus, thePAMS may be operable to support and enforce organizational policies andprocedures for network security and access control. In some embodiments,The PAMS may be, for example, a system commercially available, such as aPrivileged Account Security (PAS) System by CyberArk® Software Ltd.,assignee of this application. The PAMS make take other forms as well.

In embodiments where remediation system 1602 is configured tocommunicate and interact with a PAMS, remediation system 1602 may befurther configured to obtain additional data from the PAMS (e.g., aboutthe suspicious activities, identified accounts, and/or credentialsassociated with identified accounts) and/or instruct the PAMS to performa control action on an account or session.

In some embodiments, remediation system 1602 may include a controlaction system (not shown), as noted above. A control action system maycontain or may have access to logic (e.g., control action logic)configured to react to the received notification. In some embodiments,the logic may be updatable. For example, the logic may be updatableremotely by an external entity communicating over the communicationinterface or by a user using a graphical user interface (GUI).

In some embodiments, the control action system may be a dedicatedhardware component configured with control action logic to performcontrol action(s) with respect to associated accounts identified incomputer network 1610, thereby reacting to the suspicious activity. Thecontrol action logic may, in some embodiments, be predefined.

In some embodiments, the control action system may be configured toperform control action(s) directly on identified accounts. In someembodiments, for example, the control action system may be configured tochange credentials of some or all identified accounts. Alternatively oradditionally, the control action system may be configured to invoke acontrol action by instructing an external entity to perform the controlaction. For example, the control action system may instruct a PAMS toperform a credential change on specified accounts. Other examples arepossible as well.

In some embodiments, the control action system may be configured tocommunicate with network and/or external entities over communicationinterface 1612. Alternatively or additionally, the control action systemmay include a dedicated communication interface.

In some embodiments, the logic may be dependent on pre-configuration ofthe system, or may be specified by user or organization preference.Alternatively or additionally, in some embodiments the control actionsystem includes logic for performing one or more of:

i) Identifying accounts associated with the potentially maliciousactivity, based at least in part on analysis of the notification data;

ii) Determining which of the identified accounts should undergo controlactions;

iii) Selecting respective control actions to be performed;

iv) Causing control actions to be performed, either directly byremediation system 1602 or by invoking an external entity to perform thecontrol action. In some embodiments, for example, for a credentialchange control action, remediation system 1602 may instruct a PAMS toperform the credential change; and

v) Providing limitations to control actions. In some embodiments, forexample, an organization may choose to limit the control actions forsome accounts which are deemed critical, and for which, despite detectedpotentially malicious activity, no action should be taken. In somecases, this may be desirable in, for example, Industrial Control Systems(ICS) and/or Critical Infrastructure (CI), where any interruption in theprocess can potentially lead to more harmful impacts than those causedby malicious activities. In general, an organization may choose to limitthe control actions for some accounts.

In some embodiments, the logic may be accessed in any way known or yetto be known in the art, including, but not limited to from local memoryon remediation system 1602 or the control action system; from anexternal database or other network connected storage; and from a disk orother data storage element. The logic may be accessed in other mannersas well.

FIGS. 17A-17C are block diagrams illustrating example remediationsystems for performing operations responsive to potentially maliciousactivity, in accordance with disclosed embodiments. The remediationsystems of FIGS. 17A-17C illustrate systems which implement differentcontrol actions based on different logical rules. In some embodiments,the remediation systems may perform some or all of the logic operationsusing an external server or other hardware machine.

As shown in FIG. 17A, a remediation system 1700 may include acommunication interface 1702, a control action system 1704, and aprocessing unit 1706. Control action system 1704 may include controlaction logic 1708. Control action logic 1708 may include any logicrules, data, or other tools configured to determine control actions tobe performed and to perform the control actions or otherwise cause themto be performed. In particular, as shown, communication interface 1702may be configured to receive notification of a triggering event. Basedon the triggering event, control action system 1704 may determine,according to control action logic 1708, control actions to be performed,as shown.

Similarly, as shown in FIG. 17B, remediation system 1700 may includecommunication interface 1702, control action system 1704, and processingunit 1706. Control action system 1704 in FIG. 17B, however, may includecredential change logic 1710. Credential change logic 1710 may includeany logic rules, data, or other tools configured to determine whichaccounts should undergo a credential change and to perform thecredential change or otherwise issue instructions to cause thecredential change to be performed. In particular, as shown,communication interface 1702 may be configured to receive notificationof a triggering event. Based on the triggering event, control actionsystem 1704 may determine, according to credential change logic 1710,credential changes to be performed, as shown.

FIG. 17C shows remediation system 1700, which may include communicationinterface 1702 and processing unit 1706. Remediation system 1700 mayfurther include logic system 1712. Logic system 1712 may include anylogic rules, data, or other tools configured to determine which controlactions should be performed with respect to an identified account and toinvoke another entity or system to perform these control actions bycommunicating with the system over the network.

FIGS. 18A-18B are flow charts illustrating example methods forperforming operations responsive to potentially malicious activity, inaccordance with disclosed embodiments. Methods 1800 and 1810 may, forexample, be performed by authentication system 104, service providingsystem 106, detection system 108, and/or remediation system 110, asdescribed above in connection with FIG. 1. Similarly, methods 1800 and1810 may be performed by systems 1110, 1300, 1500, 1600, and/or 1700, asdescribed above.

A method 1800 is shown in FIG. 18A. As shown, the method 1800 includesstep 1802 of receiving an indication of potentially malicious activityin a computer network. The receiving may involve, for example, includesquerying a network resource and obtaining the indication from thequeried network resource. Other receiving is possible as well.

The method 1800 includes at step 1804 identifying, based on dataincluded in the indication, at least one network account associated withthe potentially malicious activity. A network account may be an accountproviding access to the network. In some embodiments, the identifyingmay involve querying a network resource and identifying the at least oneassociated network account from the queried network resource. Otheridentifying is possible as well.

Alternatively or additionally, in some embodiments, the at least oneidentified network account may be determined to be a source of thepotentially malicious activity. Alternatively or additionally, in someembodiments, the at least one identified network account may bedetermined to be a target of the potentially malicious activity. Stillalternatively or additionally, in some embodiments, the at least oneidentified network account may be determined based on a type of thepotentially malicious activity. And alternatively or additionally, insome embodiments, the at least one identified network account may bedetermined based on data in the received indication of the potentiallymalicious activity. The at least one identified network account may bedetermined in other manners as well.

In some embodiments, identifying the at least one network accountassociated with the potentially malicious activity may involveidentifying credential data associated with a potential network attack;determining a privileged account from which the credential dataoriginated; and identifying, as the identified network account, thedetermined privileged account. Credential data may be data indicatingcredentials used to access the network through a network account. Othercredential data is possible as well. The at least one identified networkaccount may be determined in other manners as well.

The method 1800, in some embodiments, includes at step 1806 determining,based on the identifying and further based on the data included in theindication and according to a defined policy, at least one responsiveoperation with respect to the at least one identified network account.In some embodiments, the determining may involve reading a policy file,the policy file being a locally stored policy file or a remotely storedpolicy file. Other determining is possible as well. A responsiveoperation may be any action taken to prevent, mitigate, and/or reversethe potentially malicious activity.

As referred to herein, the defined policy may be, for example, anyorganizational policy for the network related to cyber-security. Thedefined policy may govern network activity including, for example,credentials and network accounts. A policy file may be data indicatingthe defined policy.

In some embodiments, the at least one responsive operation may include,for example, taking an action on the at least one identified networkaccount. Alternatively or additionally, the at least one responsiveoperation may include changing a parameter of the defined policy. Aparameter may include, for example, any parameter governing networkactivity. Still alternatively or additionally, the at least oneresponsive operation may include storing data associated with thepotentially malicious activity. Alternatively or additionally, in someembodiments, the responsive operation may include invalidatingcredentials for the at least one identified network account.

Alternatively or additionally, in some embodiments the at least oneresponsive operation may include changing access settings of the definedpolicy for the at least one identified network account. The accesssettings may control the ability of the at least one network account toreceive incoming network communications. Still alternatively oradditionally, the at least one responsive operation may include changinguse settings of the defined policy for the at least one identifiednetwork account. The use settings may control the ability of the atleast one network account to send outgoing network communications. Insome embodiments, changing access settings may involve limiting accesssettings. Other changing of access settings is possible as well. In someembodiments, controlling an ability may involve restricting the ability.Other controlling of an ability is possible as well.

In other embodiments, the responsive operation includes taking noaction, either with or without recording data associated with the atleast one identified network account or the potentially maliciousactivity. If data is recorded, such data may include, for example, arecording (e.g., video or screen-shot simulation) of trafficcommunicated over the network, a recording of operations, keystrokes, orother user input, a recording of application operations, etc. Theresponsive operation may also include collecting traffic data, data fromuser operations, data from application activity, or creating logs, auditrecords, or forensic artifacts. In this way, recordings and/or data maybe stored that are associated with any relevant network activity ornetwork device.

Other responsive operations are possible as well.

The method 1800, in some embodiments, includes at step 1808 invoking,based on the determining, the at least one responsive operation, the atleast one responsive operation being implemented to mitigate thepotentially malicious activity in the computer network.

In some embodiments, the method 1800 may further comprise determining,based on data received in the indication, at least one related networkaccount with a relationship criteria in common with the at least oneidentified network account; determining at least one correspondingresponsive operation for the related network account; and invoking acorresponding responsive operation. A corresponding responsive operationmay be any action implemented to broaden the scope of the invoked atleast one responsive operation. Relationship criteria may indicate anyrelationship between network accounts, such as that network accounts areoperated by the same data center or accessed by the same machine. Otherrelationship criteria are possible as well.

Alternatively or additionally, in some embodiments, the method 1800 mayfurther comprise identifying a plurality of network accounts associatedwith the potentially malicious activity, each identified network accounthaving at least one associated network communications policy;determining, based on the identifying and according at least oneassociated network communications policy, at least one responsiveoperation with respect to the identified plurality of network accounts;and invoking a plurality of responsive operations with respect to theplurality of network accounts, wherein differing responsive operationsare applied to different network accounts.

Alternatively or additionally, in some embodiments, the method 1800 mayfurther comprise changing network permissions for the at least oneidentified network account. Network permissions may indicate, forexample, what network activity and/or access is permitted by the networkaccount. Other network permissions are possible as well.

Another method 1810 for performing operations responsive to potentiallymalicious activity is illustrated in FIG. 18B. In some embodiments, themethod 1810 may be performed by a remediation system, such asremediation systems 1602 and 1700 described above.

As shown, the method 1810, in some embodiments, includes step 1812 ofreceiving notification of potentially malicious activity. Thenotification may be received, for example, through a communicationinterface, such as communication interfaces 1612 and 1702 describedabove. The notification may include, for example, notification dataindicative of potentially malicious activity detected in any of theentities connected to and operating over a computer network. In someembodiments, further data may be obtained by querying other networkentities (such as a credentialing system) and/or retrieving data from adatabase, credential repository or other storage devices.

The method 1810, in some embodiments, includes at step 1814 identifyingat least one associated account. The account may be identified by, forexample, analyzing the notification data. In some embodiments,additional information relating to the potentially malicious activitymay be analyzed as well. Examples of associated accounts and theidentification of associated accounts are described below.

The method 1810, in some embodiments, includes at step 1816 selectingcontrol action(s) for the identified account. In some embodiments, acontrol action may incorporate multiple actions which are performed,possibly in a specified sequence, to control the account in the desiredmanner. Other control actions are possible as well.

In some embodiments, for example, the control actions may include one ormore of controlling access to an identified account; controlling use ofan identified account; and changing the credentials of an identifiedaccount. Other control actions are described below.

The method 1810 further includes at step 1818 performing and/or invokingthe control actions. In some embodiments, the control actions may beperformed with respect to the at least one identified associatedaccount, thereby reacting to the potentially malicious activity. In someembodiments, a control action may be performed by invoking anotherentity to perform the control action.

In some embodiments, control actions may include any action whichcontrols access to and/or use of an account. For example, a controlaction may control access to an account, for example by wholly orpartially changing, controlling, restricting, prohibiting, and/orpermitting access to the account. Alternatively or additionally, in someembodiments a control action may control use of an account, for exampleby wholly or partially changing, controlling, restricting, prohibiting,and/or permitting use of the account. Other control actions are possibleas well.

In some embodiments, control actions may include one or more of:

A) Changing the credentials of an account—Credentials may be changedaccording to account and/or service and/or network protocols required toeffect the credential change. After the credential change, the previouscredentials may no longer be used so that the danger of misuse of thecredentials is eliminated. In some embodiments, the credentials may bechanged transparently to the users. In other embodiments, the credentialchange may disrupt, at least partly, in-progress user activity. Theeffect of the credential change on users and in-progress user activitymay depend on many factors, such as the nature of the credentials, typeof suspicious activity, and type of account. Example implementations ofcredential changes are presented below.

B) Disabling an account—In some embodiments, if the account is local,then the account may be disabled on the device on which it is defined byaccessing the device and issuing a respective command. Alternatively oradditionally, if the account is network-level, then the account may bedisabled at, for example, the domain controller, by issuing a respectivecommand to the domain controller.

B) Changing the authorization policy of an account—Applying a change tothe permissions and privileges of the account by, for example, limitingthe level of access and operation it enables.

D) Limiting or terminating sessions established by the account—In someembodiments, f the session is managed by a PAMS (such as with CyberArk®PSM), the session may be terminated and/or the actions that may beperformed using the account in the managed session may be changed,controlled, and/or limited.

E) Applying additional monitoring—In some embodiments, if the actionsperformed by the account may be monitored (e.g., by built-in audit logcollection systems on machines in the network or by monitoring system inthe PAMS), then additional monitoring may be applied, possibly includingreal-time monitoring, video and text recording, over-the-shouldermonitoring etc.

Other control actions are possible as well.

Potentially malicious activity may take any number of forms. Examplepotentially malicious activity may include:

A) Kerberos-related operations, such as:

-   -   i. Pass-the-Ticket Ticket-Granting-Ticket (TGT) attacks;    -   ii. Golden Ticket attacks—typically referring to usages of TGT        that were not generated by the legitimate Key Distribution        Center (KDC). The Golden Ticket is a method to arbitrarily        generate Kerberos TGT tickets for any user of the target domain.        Therefore, it may be used to impersonate any user. Domain        Administrators accounts are often impersonated, but potentially        any legitimate user may be impersonated;    -   iii) Pass-the-Ticket Service-Ticket (ST) attacks;    -   iv) PAC attacks (also known as MS14-068 exploitation attack).        Typically refers to a new Ticket Granting Ticket (TGT) that        specifies in its PAC (i.e., in the authorization data field of        the client's Kerberos ticket) different domain groups        assignments than those specified in the legitimate TGT message        of the KDC;    -   v) Silver Ticket attacks;    -   vi) Overpass-the-Hash attack; and    -   vii) Other Kerberos-messages and Kerberos tickets.

B) NT LAN Manager (NTLM)-type attacks such as:

-   -   i) Pass-the-Hash attack; and    -   ii) Other NTLM (e.g. NTLM-relay/NTLM-replay) type attacks.

C) Unexpected User Switch;

D) Credential Theft attacks;

E) Irregular communication; and

F) Other types of anomalous operations (e.g., messaging or data oroperations) and/or account usages (e.g., from an unexpected machine orat an unexpected point of time) that are likely to pass from a usermachine to a service in a computer network on behalf of a potentialattacker requiring access to the computer network or entitycommunicating over the computer network.

G) Zero Day attacks, such as undisclosed, yet to be known, attacktechniques.

Other potentially malicious activity is possible as well.

Associated accounts may take any number of forms. Example associatedaccounts associated with various types of potentially malicious activitymay include:

A) Pass-the-ticket attack:

-   -   i. Directly associated account: An account that is using the        ticket involved in the attack. In some embodiments, the directly        associated account may be identified by accessing the logs in        the machine and analyzing stored data to determine which        account(s) were logged on during the time of the attack.    -   ii. Indirectly associated account: An account having the Local        Administrator privileges on the machine from which the ticket        specified in the notification was extracted. Extracting Kerberos        tickets of a specific account's session may require local        machine administrative privileges. Therefore, when a        Pass-the-Ticket attack occurs, it may be that one or more of the        local administrative accounts have been compromised. In some        embodiments, the indirectly associated accounts may be        identified utilizing application program interfaces (APIs), such        as Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI) tools on the        machine.

B) Golden Ticket attack:

-   -   i. Directly associated accounts:        -   a. The KRBTGT account;        -   b. The account utilizing the Golden Ticket specified by the            notification. In some embodiments, information about the            actual account utilizing the ticket may be extracted from            the machine hosting the account utilizing the Golden Ticket            on which the attack was executed. Information about the            machine may be extracted from the notification.    -   ii. Indirectly associated account: All domain accounts (users,        services, machines) and local accounts (that are not managed by        the Domain Controller), particularly accounts having domain        administrative privileges.

C) PAC attack:

-   -   i. Directly associated account: The account utilizing the ticket        with the forged PAC. The account utilizing the ticket may be        specified in the triggering event.    -   ii. Indirectly associated account: Local Administrator accounts        on the machine from which the forged PAC was transmitted. In        some embodiments, altering and injecting Kerberos ticket        requires local administrative privileges. Therefore, when a PAC        attack occurs, it may be that one or more of the local        administrative accounts have been compromised and should be        changed. In some embodiments, the local administrative accounts        are extracted with WMI tools on the machine.

D) NTLM attack:

i. Directly associated account:

a. The impersonated account—The impersonated account was compromised andits password hash was used to carry out the attack. Information aboutthe account may be specified in the triggering event.

b. The impersonating account—An account that is suspected ofimpersonating another account. Impersonating accounts are logged on tothe machine at the time of the attack. Information about the machine maybe specified in the triggering event. Information about the accounts maythen be obtained from that machine by using WMI tools.

ii. Indirectly associated account: Local Administrator accounts on themachine where the attack was carried out. Altering and injectingpassword hashes require local administrative privileges. Therefore, whenan NTLM attack occurs, it is likely that one or more of the localadministrative accounts have been compromised and should be changed.Information about the machine may be specified in the triggering event.The local administrative accounts may be extracted with WMI tools on themachine.

E) Unexpected User Switch anomaly:

-   -   i. Directly associated accounts:        -   a. The account initiating the switch. Information about the            account may be specified in the triggering event.        -   b. The target account of the switch. Information about the            account may be specified in the triggering event.    -   ii. Indirectly associated account: Local Administrator accounts        on the machine where the activity took place. Information about        the machine where the activity took place may be specified in        the triggering event. Information about the accounts may then be        obtained from the specified machine using WMI tools.

F) Credential Theft attack:

-   -   i. Directly associated account: An account associated with the        stolen credentials. Information about the account may be        specified in the triggering event.    -   ii. Indirectly associated account: Local Administrator accounts        on the machine where the activity took place. Information about        the machine where the activity took place may be specified in        the triggering event. Information about the accounts may then be        obtained from the specified machine by using WMI tools.

G) Irregular Communication

-   -   i. Directly associated account: The account associated with the        irregular communications. Information about the account may be        specified by the triggering event.    -   ii. Indirectly associated account: Local Administrator accounts        on the machine where the activity took place. Information about        the machine may be specified in the Triggering Event.        Information about the accounts may then be obtained from that        machine by using WMI tools.

Other associated accounts are possible as well.

Associated accounts may be identified in any number of manners. In someembodiments, for example, associated accounts may be identified by:

A) Analyzing data included in the notification: An associated accountmay be identified by analyzing credential information and/or accountinformation included in the notification. In the case of a Silver Ticketattack, for example, the notification may include a) the user accountrequesting the ticket of the attack and b) information about the serviceaccount on which the attack is designated to operate. This informationmay be used to query the repository to identify account(s) associatedwith the Silver Ticket. In some embodiments, this information may beused to access a repository, database, or other credential storageentity and to identify the account(s) associated with the detectedticket.

B) Accessing an external resource—An associated account may beidentified by utilizing a special command or API to access an externalresource, such as a domain controller, to obtain account information. Insome embodiments, for example, an operating system API, such as WMI, maybe used to access the machine specified in the triggering event in orderto identify the relevant accounts operating on that machine based oninformation available about the suspicious events (e.g. notificationdata and data obtained from other network entities). Alternatively oradditionally, in some embodiments, the “setspn” command may be used toaccess an external resource, such as the domain controller, and identifythe relevant account(s) accordingly. The “setspn” command is a toolavailable by default in all Windows versions, which may be used to findassociated accounts with a particular service, for example by using thecommand syntax: Setspn-Q<service>/<machine.domain_name>.

C) Logic-based identification—Based on specified logic, which isoptionally defined or configurable for a particular service or servicetype. For example, for file system services such as Common Internet FileSystem (CIFS) the service account involved in the attack may be definedto be an associated account. In other words, an account associated withthe ticket of a detected attack may be the machine account of the targetmachine (e.g. target server).

Associated accounts may be determined in other manners as well.

Any number of credential change control actions are possible. In someembodiments, for example, credential change controls actions may includeone or more of:

A) PMWindows—changes windows local and win-domain accounts using win-apicalls such as WNetAddConnection2 (similar to net-use),NetUserChangePassword and WnetCancelConnection2.

B) PMWMIRemoteExecution—changes windows local and win-domain accountsusing WMI (which runs cmd commands on remote machine). It connects tothe remote machines processes namespace and registry, creates a cmdwhich runs the password change action and then it reads the return valuefrom the machine's registry.

C) For service accounts each service account type has its own plug-in.Sometimes the logon and credential change may be performed using a logonaccount or a reconcile account (when the account cannot log on or changeits own password).

Any number of service account credential change control actions arepossible. In some embodiments, for example, service account credentialchange controls actions may include one or more of:

i. WinService—if it is a SQL service then it connects to the server withWMI, gets the sql namespace and service's state and then changes it withWMI. Otherwise, it uses win-api to logon as the account's user(Impersonate), locks and opens the ServiceActive database with fullaccess rights (using SC Manager), recursively changes the password ofthe service and any dependent services with the same account and finallystarts the services and unlocks the database.

ii. IISAppPool and IISAnonymous services—the password is changed usingWMI.

iii. SSH Keys (on Unix machines only)—the Central Policy Manager runs aprocess (PMTerminal) that calls a plug-in (currently written in python)that connects to the remote machine SFTP and SSH, finds the relevantuser's key file and changes the key.

Other service account credential change control actions are possible aswell.

4) Credential change by a credentialing system, such as a PAMS.Optionally the method may include prompting a credentialing system tochange credentials for specified associated accounts. The credentialmanagement system may be configured to connect with the differententities operating in and connected to the computer network and furthercommunicate with the different accounts of the entities that are underits control. Examples of entities to which the credential managementsystem connects may include one or more of: target services, usermachines (clients), Active Directory®, network connected devices (suchas routers, switches etc.), databases and more.

Optionally, the credentialing system may be configured to change (e.g.,update, rotate, etc.) the credentials of any one of the accounts ofthese entities on a regularized basis based on a defined policy, andfurther according to the system requirements.

In some embodiments, the credential change flow may have two phases: alogon phase and a change phase. At the logon phase, the credentialingsystem may initiate a logon process in an attempt to logon using thecurrent credentials (e.g. password, user name, etc.). If that logonprocess fails, the credentialing system may perform a secondary logonprocess using either the saved backup credentials or the backupcontaining the new credentials. If the logon process succeeds with oneof the backups, those backup credentials may be saved as the correctcredentials and other backups are deleted. At the change phase, theaccount status may be read and then verified to make sure that theaccount is not already in a process. When the account is already in aprocess the change may be postponed. When the account is a serviceaccount, the credentials object may be locked. When the credentialchange does not specify the next credentials (such as a password), newcredentials may be generated (for example, a new key with puttygen forSSH keys). Backups for the current and new credentials may be saved inthe system. The new credentials may be stored in a vault temporarily,and may become permanent after the change in the remote machine.

In some embodiments, a “credentials changer” process may be utilized inorder to call the plug-in for the specific platform in order to changethe credentials on the remote machine.

5) In some embodiments a credentials change may be carried out on theaccount that originally generated the credentials (e.g., the ticket)used in the attack. In some instances, such as in the case of a GoldenTicket attack, to achieve real-time remediation of the attack it may notbe enough merely to identify an account that is associated with theticket of the attack and to change the credentials of that account. Forexample, in a Golden Ticket attack the attacker may create a new ticketfor any desired username (including an invalid or un-existing username)and use this ticket without any credentials.

In some embodiments, the credential change may be performed more thanone time in order to overcome existing system architecture solutionswhich store currently in use credentials and also the previouscredentials (e.g., rotational groups that allow a grace period in whichboth the old password and the new one are valid). For example, withrespect to a Kerberos Golden Ticket, credential change may be performedby resetting the KRBTGT account password twice. Since resetting thepassword of a user account does not block the usage of the relatedGolden Ticket, the Golden Ticket becomes invalid only if the wholepassword history (i.e., former hashes stored in the Active Directory®)is reset (by default this occurs after two password resets). Resettingthe built-in KRBTGT password twice invalidates any Golden Ticketscreated with the previously KRBTGT hash as well as all other Kerberostickets.

In some embodiments, an account suspected of generating the credentialsmay be identified by determining the accounts logged on to the machinethe ticket was used from at the time if the actual usage. The securitylogs residing on every endpoint machine may register the accounts thathave been used to access the machine and may be analyzed to expose theaccounts suspected of using the Golden Ticket. Information about thesuspected accounts may be then obtained using WMI tools.

In some embodiments, in addition to identifying associated accounts,supplementary accounts may be identified. Supplementary accounts may notbe directly involved with the specific suspicious activity detected, butmay be potentially relevant accounts that may potentially be affected orimpacted by the detected potentially malicious activities. Supplementaryaccounts may include, for example:

A) Other user accounts in the same operational unit operating in andcontrolled by a Data Center (e.g., Active Directory®) of the system;

B) Other machine accounts operating in the Data Center or in the samesubnet; and

C) Other service accounts in the same machine.

Other supplementary accounts are possible as well.

Supplementary accounts in the same operational unit in a Data Center maybe identified by, for example, connecting with the particularoperational unit and querying it about resident accounts for obtaininginformation about additional accounts that are associated with analready identified account. Supplementary accounts may be identified inother manners as well.

In some embodiments, all local administrator accounts on a specified(possibly compromised) machine may be located by executing the “Netlocalgroup administrators” command on the specified machine. The commandlists all accounts with local administrator privileges. Thus, if one ofthe local administrator accounts on the machine is compromised thepasswords may be changed for all local administrator accounts.

Accounts may be identified in other manners as well.

FIG. 19 is a block diagram of an example remediation system 1900cooperating with a credentialing system 1908, in accordance withdisclosed embodiments. As shown, remediation system 1900 includescommunication interface 1904 and processing unit 1906. Communicationinterface 1904 and processing unit 1906 may take any of the formsdescribed above for communication interfaces 1612 and 1702 andprocessing units 1614 and 1706, respectively. Similarly, system 1900may, for example, correspond to system 104, service providing system106, detection system 108, and/or remediation system 110, as describedabove in connection with FIG. 1.

Remediation system 1900 may be configured to receive notifications, suchas in the form of a triggering event, of potentially maliciousactivities detected in the computer network and to perform controlactions on one or more accounts associated with the suspiciousactivities. In some embodiments, for example, the control action may bea credential change performed by connecting with credentialing system1908.

Network entities credentialing system 1908, source machine(s) 1910, andtarget services 1918 may be connected over a computer network by, forexample, a network interface. While only a single target server 1912 isshown, it will be understood that more target servers are possible aswell. In some embodiments, for example, the target services may resideon multiple servers and/or machines connected to the computer network.

Credentialing system 1908 may be configured to manage user accountcredentials (e.g., passwords) by interacting with the network entitiesthat are under its control (either directly, or indirectly) on aregularized basis and by changing (e.g., updating, rotating) credentials(e.g., passwords, SSH keys, tokens, etc.) of the identified accountsthat are associated with the potentially malicious activities. In someembodiments, credentialing system 1908 may take the form of a PAMSsystem, as described above.

Remediation system 1902 may be configured to communicate withcredentialing system 1908, via the network interface, to promptcredentialing system 1908 to carry out the control action (e.g.,credential change) on selected associated account(s). The associatedaccount(s) may include, for example, one or more of a user machine(client), a target service of a connected target server in the system,and accounts of other entities connected in the computer network. Otherassociated accounts are possible as well.

In some embodiments, one or more of components of system 1900 may beimplemented in whole or in part using cloud-based, on-demand, or otherInternet-enabled computing. For instance, the functions of remediationsystem 1902, credentialing system 1908, target server 1912, sourcemachine(s) 1910, and/or data center 1920 may, in some embodiments, beprovided as cloud-based, on-demand, or other Internet-enabled servicesaccessible over an Internet connection. In some embodiments,communicative coupling among remediation system 1902, credentialingsystem 1908, target server 1912, source machine(s) 1910, and/or datacenter 1920 may be via an Internet connection.

In some embodiments, the credentials change may involve changingpasswords, SSH keys, tickets, tokens, etc. The notification may be inthe form of a triggering event that is issued in the system upondetection of a computer attack or other anomalous activity.

As users retrieve credentials from credentialing system 1908 (or connectthrough credentialing system 1908), the users may receive and useup-to-date account credentials. In this manner, operational outage dueto invalidation of user or service account credentials may be limited orprevented.

It is to be understood that the invention is not necessarily limited inits application to the details of construction and the arrangement ofthe components and/or methods set forth in the following descriptionand/or illustrated in the drawings and/or the Examples. The invention iscapable of other embodiments or of being practiced or carried out invarious ways.

The present invention may be a system, a method, and/or a computerprogram product. The computer program product may include a computerreadable storage medium (or media) having computer readable programinstructions thereon for causing a processor to carry out aspects of thepresent invention.

The computer readable storage medium can be a tangible device that canretain and store instructions for use by an instruction executiondevice. The computer readable storage medium may be, for example, but isnot limited to, an electronic storage device, a magnetic storage device,an optical storage device, an electromagnetic storage device, asemiconductor storage device, or any suitable combination of theforegoing. A non-exhaustive list of more specific examples of thecomputer readable storage medium includes the following: a portablecomputer diskette, a hard disk, a random access memory (RAM), aread-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROMor Flash memory), a static random access memory (SRAM), a portablecompact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), a digital versatile disk (DVD),a memory stick, a floppy disk, a mechanically encoded device such aspunch-cards or raised structures in a groove having instructionsrecorded thereon, and any suitable combination of the foregoing. Acomputer readable storage medium, as used herein, is not to be construedas being transitory signals per se, such as radio waves or other freelypropagating electromagnetic waves, electromagnetic waves propagatingthrough a waveguide or other transmission media (e.g., light pulsespassing through a fiber-optic cable), or electrical signals transmittedthrough a wire.

Computer readable program instructions described herein can bedownloaded to respective computing/processing devices from a computerreadable storage medium or to an external computer or external storagedevice via a network, for example, the Internet, a local area network, awide area network and/or a wireless network. The network may comprisecopper transmission cables, optical transmission fibers, wirelesstransmission, routers, firewalls, switches, gateway computers and/oredge servers. A network adapter card or network interface in eachcomputing/processing device receives computer readable programinstructions from the network and forwards the computer readable programinstructions for storage in a computer readable storage medium withinthe respective computing/processing device.

Computer readable program instructions for carrying out operations ofthe present invention may be assembler instructions,instruction-set-architecture (ISA) instructions, machine instructions,machine dependent instructions, microcode, firmware instructions,state-setting data, or either source code or object code written in anycombination of one or more programming languages, including an objectoriented programming language such as Smalltalk, C++ or the like, andconventional procedural programming languages, such as the “C”programming language or similar programming languages. The computerreadable program instructions may execute entirely on the user'scomputer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone softwarepackage, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote computeror entirely on the remote computer or server. In the latter scenario,the remote computer may be connected to the user's computer through anytype of network, including a local area network (LAN) or a wide areanetwork (WAN), or the connection may be made to an external computer(for example, through the Internet using an Internet Service Provider).In some embodiments, electronic circuitry including, for example,programmable logic circuitry, field-programmable gate arrays (FPGA), orprogrammable logic arrays (PLA) may execute the computer readableprogram instructions by utilizing state information of the computerreadable program instructions to personalize the electronic circuitry,in order to perform aspects of the present invention.

Aspects of the present invention are described herein with reference toflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus(systems), and computer program products according to embodiments of theinvention. It will be understood that each block of the flowchartillustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in theflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented bycomputer readable program instructions.

These computer readable program instructions may be provided to aprocessor of a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, orother programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, suchthat the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computeror other programmable data processing apparatus, create means forimplementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks. These computer readable program instructionsmay also be stored in a computer readable storage medium that can directa computer, a programmable data processing apparatus, and/or otherdevices to function in a particular manner, such that the computerreadable storage medium having instructions stored therein comprises anarticle of manufacture including instructions which implement aspects ofthe function/act specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram blockor blocks.

The computer readable program instructions may also be loaded onto acomputer, other programmable data processing apparatus, or other deviceto cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer,other programmable apparatus or other device to produce a computerimplemented process, such that the instructions which execute on thecomputer, other programmable apparatus, or other device implement thefunctions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block orblocks.

The methods as described above may be used in the fabrication ofintegrated circuit chips.

The flowchart and block diagrams in the Figures illustrate thearchitecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementationsof systems, methods and computer program products according to variousembodiments of the present invention. In this regard, each block in theflowchart or block diagrams may represent a software module, segment, orportion of code, which comprises one or more executable instructions forimplementing the specified logical function(s). It should also be notedthat, in some alternative implementations, the functions noted in theblock may occur out of the order noted in the figures. For example, twoblocks shown in succession may, in fact, be executed substantiallyconcurrently, or the blocks may sometimes be executed in the reverseorder, depending upon the functionality involved. It will also be notedthat each block of the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, andcombinations of blocks in the block diagrams and/or flowchartillustration, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-basedsystems that perform the specified functions or acts, or combinations ofspecial purpose hardware and computer instructions.

The descriptions of the various embodiments of the present inventionhave been presented for purposes of illustration, but are not intendedto be exhaustive or limited to the embodiments disclosed. Manymodifications and variations will be apparent to those of ordinary skillin the art without departing from the scope and spirit of the describedembodiments. The terminology used herein was chosen to best explain theprinciples of the embodiments, the practical application or technicalimprovement over technologies found in the marketplace, or to enableothers of ordinary skill in the art to understand the embodimentsdisclosed herein.

It is expected that during the life of a patent maturing from thisapplication many relevant clients, target services, protocols,communication networks, messages and tickets will be developed and thescope of the term client, target service, protocol, communicationnetwork, message and ticket is intended to include all such newtechnologies a priori.

It is appreciated that certain features of the invention, which are, forclarity, described in the context of separate embodiments, may also beprovided in combination in a single embodiment. Conversely, variousfeatures of the invention, which are, for brevity, described in thecontext of a single embodiment, may also be provided separately or inany suitable subcombination or as suitable in any other describedembodiment of the invention. Certain features described in the contextof various embodiments are not to be considered essential features ofthose embodiments, unless the embodiment is inoperative without thoseelements.

Although the invention has been described in conjunction with specificembodiments thereof, it is evident that many alternatives, modificationsand variations will be apparent to those skilled in the art.Accordingly, it is intended to embrace all such alternatives,modifications and variations that fall within the spirit and broad scopeof the appended claims.

What is claimed is:
 1. A non-transitory computer readable mediumincluding instructions that, when executed by at least one processor,cause the at least one processor to perform operations for detectingpotentially malicious activity, comprising: receiving data associatedwith a plurality of authentication messages, wherein at least some ofthe received data includes secure ticket data, the authenticationmessages having been communicated over a network and the plurality ofauthentication messages includes at least one of ticket-granting ticketrequests and service ticket requests; analyzing the received dataassociated with the plurality of authentication messages; determining,based on the analyzing, a plurality of characteristics of the dataassociated with the authentication messages, wherein a characteristicfrom the plurality of characteristics includes the secure ticket data;receiving data associated with a new authentication message communicatedover the network; determining a plurality of characteristics of the dataassociated with the new authentication message; comparing at least onedetermined characteristic of the new authentication message data with atleast one of: a determined characteristic of the plurality ofauthentication messages data, known valid data, and known invalid data,wherein the comparing includes: determining whether the newauthentication message data includes a ticket; identifying a machinefrom which the new authentication message data originated; andascertaining whether the ticket was previously sent to the machine fromwhich the new authentication message originated; and generating, basedon the comparison, an assessment of whether the new authenticationmessage is indicative of the potentially malicious activity in thenetwork.
 2. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1,wherein generating the assessment includes performing a protectivefalse-positive detection operation to limit false-positive indicationsfrom the potentially malicious activity indications.
 3. Thenon-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein generatingthe assessment includes determining whether the new authenticationmessage data is associated with a potential attack in the network. 4.The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, whereingenerating the assessment includes determining information containingthe potentially malicious activity.
 5. The non-transitory computerreadable medium of claim 1, further including identifying a networkaccount associated with a sender of the received data associated withthe new authentication message, and executing a responsive measure withrespect to the identified network account.
 6. The non-transitorycomputer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the new authenticationmessage is encrypted, and the comparing is based on encrypted data ofthe new authentication message without first decrypting the encrypteddata.
 7. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, whereinthe comparing includes determining whether data from the newauthentication message matches data from the received data from theplurality of authentication messages.
 8. The non-transitorycomputer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the comparing includesdetermining whether data from the new authentication message includes aflag that is not included in the received data from the plurality ofauthentication messages.
 9. The non-transitory computer-readable mediumof claim 1, wherein the comparing includes determining whether anencryption type associated with the new authentication message datamatches an encryption type associated with the received data from theplurality of authentication messages.
 10. The non-transitorycomputer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the comparing includesdetermining whether the new authentication message data includes aticket that is also included in the received data from the plurality ofauthentication messages.
 11. The non-transitory computer-readable mediumof claim 1, wherein the comparing includes: determining whether the newauthentication message data includes a ticket; identifying a machinefrom which the new authentication message data originated; andascertaining whether the ticket was previously sent to the machine fromwhich the new authentication message originated.
 12. The non-transitorycomputer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein the comparing includesdetermining whether an encryption attribute of an authenticationmessage, from the plurality of authentication messages, matches anencryption attribute of the new authentication message.
 13. Thenon-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1, wherein theplurality of authentication messages include Kerberos messages and thenew authentication message is a Kerberos message.
 14. The non-transitorycomputer-readable medium of claim 1, further comprising intercepting thenew authentication message and determining, based on the assessment,whether to transmit the new authentication message to a targetapplication.
 15. A network system configured for detecting potentiallymalicious activity, the network system comprising: at least onecomputer-readable memory storing instructions; and at least oneprocessor configured to execute the instructions to: receive dataassociated with a plurality of authentication messages, wherein at leastsome of the received data includes secure ticket data, theauthentication messages having been communicated over a network and theplurality of authentication messages includes at least one ofticket-granting ticket requests and service ticket requests; analyze thereceived data associated with the plurality of authentication messages;determine, based on the analysis, a plurality of characteristics of thedata associated with the authentication messages, wherein acharacteristic from the plurality of characteristics includes the secureticket data; receive data associated with a new authentication messagecommunicated over the network; determine a plurality of characteristicsof the data associated with the new authentication message; compare atleast one determined characteristic of the new authentication messagedata with at least one of: a determined characteristic of the pluralityof authentication messages data, known valid data, and known invaliddata, wherein the comparing includes: determining whether the newauthentication message data includes a ticket; identifying a machinefrom which the new authentication message data originated; andascertaining whether the ticket was previously sent to the machine fromwhich the new authentication message originated; and generate, based onthe comparison, an assessment of whether the new authentication messageis indicative of the potentially malicious activity in the network. 16.The network system of claim 15, wherein the generation of the assessmentincludes performing a protective false-positive detection operation tolimit false-positive indications from the potentially malicious activityindications.
 17. The network system of claim 15, wherein the at leastone processor is further configured to execute the instructions toidentify a network account associated with a sender of the received dataassociated with a new authentication message, and execute a responsivemeasure with respect to the identified network account.
 18. The networksystem of claim 15, wherein the comparison includes a determination ofwhether data from the new authentication message matches data from thereceived data from the plurality of authentication messages.
 19. Thenetwork system of claim 15, wherein the comparison includes adetermination of whether data from the new authentication messageincludes a flag that is not included in the received data from theplurality of authentication messages.
 20. The network system of claim15, wherein the comparison includes a determination of whether anencryption type associated with the new authentication message datamatches an encryption type associated with the received data from theplurality of authentication messages.
 21. The network system of claim15, wherein the plurality of authentication messages include Kerberosmessages and the new authentication message is a Kerberos message. 22.The network system of claim 15, wherein the new authentication messageis an intercepted message, such that the generation of the assessmentoccurs before a determination of whether to transmit the new secureticket message to the target application.
 23. A computer-implementedmethod for performing potentially malicious activity detectionoperations, comprising: receiving data associated with a plurality ofauthentication messages, wherein at least some of the received dataincludes secure ticket data, the authentication messages having beencommunicated over a network and the plurality of authentication messagesincludes at least one of ticket-granting ticket requests and serviceticket requests; analyzing the received data associated with theplurality of authentication messages; determining, based on theanalyzing, a plurality of characteristics of the data associated withthe authentication messages, wherein a characteristic from the pluralityof characteristics includes the secure ticket data; receiving dataassociated with a new authentication message communicated over thenetwork; determining a plurality of characteristics of the dataassociated with the new authentication message; comparing at least onedetermined characteristic of the new authentication message data with atleast one of: a determined characteristic of the plurality ofauthentication messages data, known valid data, and known invalid data,wherein the comparing includes: determining whether the newauthentication message data includes a ticket; identifying a machinefrom which the new authentication message data originated; andascertaining whether the ticket was previously sent to the machine fromwhich the new authentication message originated; and generating, basedon the comparison, an assessment of whether the new authenticationmessage is indicative of the potentially malicious activity in thenetwork.
 24. The computer-implemented method of claim 23, wherein thecomparing includes determining whether an encryption type associatedwith the new authentication message data matches an encryption typeassociated with the received data from the plurality of authenticationmessages.
 25. The computer-implemented method of claim 23, wherein thecomparing includes determining whether the new authentication messagedata includes a ticket that is also included in the received data fromthe plurality of authentication messages.